fabioquadros_ gave kudos to peteyt in Your LiveGrid system needs tweaking
While I completely agree with your statement, nothing can be 100 percent, but does that mean we shouldn't put in things to try and stop it? By that logic couldn't we argue that why bother with protection if some kind of malware could theoretically be designed to bypass or disable an AV (yes I know my comparison is slightly different to the issue we are talking about and AVs have tech to stop these).
I do think we will see a lot more people requesting a folder system for ransomware protection. As mentioned before I'd love to see a better system for advanced users for warning them about files with no to low reputation. I get that eset doesn't want to cause issues and confusion for average users but surely that shouldn't mean the more advanced users should go without. Just make it harder to find and enable these things and make it clear when enabling the risks.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to Nightowl in Release 13.2.15 before official announcement
You are just angry at something that you can't change , all companies do the same , they release an update and then they give the change notes after a while , or go meet Microsoft , they won't tell you what changed. or say hello to Steam
I don't represent ESET , and I don't work for them , but a delay of a bit or few hours after being posted in their download page and after that to their forum , it doesn't mean anything bad , they have posted it they didn't hide them , It's just a matter of a little bit of time delaying the upgrade so you can read the notes and after than initiate your upgrade or delay it for next version.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to ajgamer in GTA V / Online Crash because of ESET Internet Security or EIS
That didn't work either.
Please if someone from ESET could help me with this issue?
I uninstalled EIS again.
I have just purchased 1 year subscription of KasperSky Internet Security 2020.
I did nothing additional to do anything like exclusions or disable. No manual settings, just straight forward install and activated the license.
Game is working fine, Loading everything perfectly. No Crash!
That doesn't mean, I am stopping here. Even though I paid to KasperSky for 1 year already. I don't want to retain with them infact, I want to shift to ESET.
Reason I bought KasperSky is because it's been around week and we have not come up to any progressive conclusion. I've given enough proof that ESET is causing the issue. I cannot keep my security at risk because ESET is not acknowledging it at all.
If we can fix the concern, I will move back to EIS HAPPILY! (I trust ESET for a decade now).
My License with ESET is pending to expire in 2021 (Late around November). Please also let me know how you can extend or pause that so that I don't loose my days because your software being the culprit is making me not using your services temporarily.
Proof that GTA Online works fine with KasperSky (1 Year Subscription and not Trial).
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to peteyt in This guys test a few days ago with Eset
The thing is when people get infected they tend to blame the AV for not protecting them but they rarely ask the important question of where did it come from. I've seen a lot of people in the past for example downloading illegal cracks and even adding them as exceptions and then when they turn out to be actually malicious they blame the AV. These same type of users probably ignore window updates including patches but then complain when they get exploited even though there was a patch available.
For me like yourself it comes down to preference AV wise. Most of the well known AVs tend to get similar scores across AV tests. If you kept going for the one that was top you'd be moving constantly and it gets more complicated when you look at different tests and see different scores.
If your AV is doing you good unless it scores very poor on a reputable test e.g. not a YouTuber, your best sticking. As they say if it isn't broken don't fix it.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to itman in This guys test a few days ago with Eset
Let's talk about malware delivery since I am really tired of this ad hoc amateur testing baloney.
90%+ of malware including ransomware arrives on a device via e-mail. That is the malware dropper is the e-mail itself. If your going to test a product's anti-malware capability, you need to duplicate how the malware was delivered. This means your malware sample needs to be the source e-mail. Additionally, the e-mail must be delivered through normal e-mail methods; not downloaded as a password protected archive malware sample. If downloaded as an archive, extract the e-mail malware sample and e-mail to yourself.
What is going on with these ad hoc tests is the samples being used are malware components embedded in the e-mail; scripts or whatever. Running these outside the context on how they were actually deployed is not only irresponsible, it is ridiculous. The common perception being perpetuated is that the malware payload; i.e. sample, is effective regardless of how it is deployed. That's is a flat out misconception.
Finally, ponder a bit on what is the basic element of malware behavior testing. That element is duplicating the behavior on how the malware was delivered originally.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to Marcos in This guys test a few days ago with Eset
Even if we forget the fact that it's a synthetic test with Web access protection ruled out which is an important 1st defense layer in real world, ESET still scored 100%. However, disabling also real-time protection makes the AV product even more crippled since real-time protection affects especially HIPS as already explained. In real world that would equal to a situation when an attacker managed to log in remotely or locally with administrator rights, disabled or uninstalled the AV and then the user wondered how come the AV hadn't protected him or her.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to itman in This guys test a few days ago with Eset
Another "absurd" test from the PC Security Channel.
To begin, the author is an Emsisoft employee that "supposedly" runs this web site independently. If you believe that, I assume you also still believe in the tooth fairy.
The reason why he disabled real-time scanning is his supposed objective is to test Eset's behavior detection. He repeatedly refers to Eset's HIPS indicating the fool has no idea how Eset's protection mechanisms work. By disabling real-time protection, he disabled the most important new Eset protection; Augur's advanced machine learning.
This type of "garbage" testing is what you would expect from the amateur ad hoc malware test sites. These also espouse disabling a security solution's real-time protection to supposedly test a products behavior detection capability. However, the PC Security Channel author purports that he is a skilled "security professional."
Finally and most import and highlighted previously by @Marcos is this. Malware doesn't just "magically" arrive on your PC. All this like crap testing assumes just that since the amateurs just run their previously downloaded password protected archived samples one after another. The whole objective of modern security software is to prevent those downloads from happening. If this can be achieved, anything after that point is irrelevant.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to Marcos in This guys test a few days ago with Eset
You can see in the test that ESET detected 100% of the samples in that SYNTHETIC (ie. not a real-world) "test" so no better result could be achieved.
We have already commented on it as follows:
This test is completely wrong. First of all, you skip the very first layer of defense - Web access protection which is very strong in ESET and blocks download from malicious urls which could save users in many cases from new malware even entering the system. Secondly, by disabling real-time protection you prevent HIPS from receiving events on the file system level and thus make HIPS and all HIPS dependent components ineffective, such as: Ransomware shield, Exploit Blocker, Advanced Memory Scanner, Deep Behavior Inspection, Advanced Machine Learning, etc.
Disabling real-time protection is not just disabling the use of signatures which are, by the way, typically smart DNA signatures in case of ESET, ie. they only describe the malicious behavior to be detected. Disabling RTP prevents other modules from working effectively since they won't receive information about file system events which have nothing to do with signature detection whatsoever.
In real world users must not and do not disable particular protection modules. If they do, they must understand they do it at their own risk and expose the machine to malware attacks and infection.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to Marcos in Suggestions for ESET
Application Control is planned.
A research was already made, currently there are no plans to back up files. We focus on protection since letting malware run has always negative consequences and 100% remedy is often not possible. Not to say that backing up any files in the event of modification has adverse effect on performance and that could render the machine unusable if big files are modified.
ESET software is install-and-forget. End users use automatic mode in which they are not prompted for actions (firewall, HIPS, malware cleaning, etc.).
Patch management is not currently planned. If there is one day, it will be probably in business products. Most likely it would not be a part of ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
That is not planned. ESET uses a strong URL scanner which protects users from suspicious or malicious URLs.
Not planned. There are other add-ons and 3rd party applications for that, we make antimalware software.
Anti-keylogger is part of the secured browser used by Banking and payment protection.
Not sure if this is planned but there's a chance we'll have it in the future.
I have no clue what you mean. Both the peer and server would have to support it so SSL is best thing for securing connection.
Behavior Blocker as well as HIPS and other malware are constantly being improved.
ESET has always been able to clean malware, e.g. if infected by Virut or other file infecting virus. Cleaning is not possible if a virus rewrites vital data in files.
Again, we make antimalware software. There are other vendors that make hypervizors, such as VMware, Oracle, etc.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to Marcos in ESET Home products and av-test.org
Both products are more-less same in terms of protection features. On the othet hand taking part in tests is quite costly so AV makers have to make decisions about spending the money effectively which is one of the reasons for that.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to itman in Web Site Magecart Attacks - Kudos to Eset Again!
First a recent reference article:
Credit Card Skimmer Found on Nine Sites, Researchers Ignored
So I decided to test Eset on detection capability. Per the linked article, picked one of the infected sites - Bahimi swimwear shop - first infected in November, 2019, the skimmer is still there today.
Attempted to order something here: https://bahimi.com/gbp/checkout/onepage/ .
Eset immediately detected the card skimmer:
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to Nightowl in ESET Memories
Oh this is very old! , I never had my hands on it , it would be awesome to have our hands on the installers again to make some fun with XP virtual machines , but I guess that is not possible
But I miss those days , golden time.
When you had to remove Norton because it's eating most of the 512MB of RAM and switching to ESET for it being light on the PC
v2 Control Panel I found it :
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to Nightowl in ESET to support development of a Coronavirus PCR test in Slovakia, donates the first 100,000 samples
Thank you ESET
An antivirus in digital and real life
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to Marcos in ESET to support development of a Coronavirus PCR test in Slovakia, donates the first 100,000 samples
Scientists from Slovak companies MultiplexDX, Lambda Life and ProScience Tech have joined forces with virologists from the Biomedical Center of the Slovak Academy of Sciences (BMC SAV) to build a reagent kit according to the World Health Organization (WHO) protocol for reliable detection of SARS-CoV-2. In the first phase they plan to produce and make available 100,000 PCR tests. The ESET Foundation supported the development of the test and finances the first 100,000 pieces to be offered as a gift to the Slovak Republic.
Key components have been developed and manufactured by MultiplexDX, a company dedicated to developing and manufacturing innovative reagents for various molecular diagnostic methods. The Slovak PCR test is currently being validated in cooperation with a team of scientists from the BMC SAS. Preliminary results show not only the functionality but also the good sensitivity of the new test, comparable to the currently used diagnostics. “This means that our test is reliable and accurate and can help diagnose early-stage patients. We can produce key components for 100,000 PCR tests in two weeks, ”explains Pavol Čekan, founder of MultiplexDX.
“In the process of validation and subsequent registration of the resulting report we cooperate with the non-profit organization CCCT SK. It will be estimated to take about three weeks, ”said Adam Andráško of ProScience Tech. "Virus detection consists of sample collection, RNA isolation and PCR diagnostics itself, with our joint efforts focused on the last step," said Ivan Juráš of Lambda Life. “I believe that the efforts of our scientists will be crowned with success, and we will have enough PCR tests from our own resources as important as coronavirus detection. This will help Slovakia not only in continuous testing, but we will also create a reserve in case there is a shortage of tests in the world, ”notes Robert Mistrík from the permanent crisis staff.
The ESET Foundation supported the development of the test and provided funding for the first 100,000 units from the COVID-19 Effective Diagnosis and Prevention Fund. These tests will be offered as a gift to Slovak state institutions. “When creating the Fund, it was important for us to ensure effective mass-scale diagnostics, which can only be achieved through science. Even in such a critical situation, the importance of supporting science in Slovakia, which we have been dedicated to for a long time, thus proves important, ”says Richard Marko, CEO of ESET.
Production capacities will primarily be available to diagnostic laboratories in Slovakia after the first 100,000 tests have been used. “We are ready to cooperate with state laboratories, flexibly respond to their needs and supply them efficiently. After meeting the needs of Slovak Laboratories, we can direct our capacities to other countries that would need our products, ”explains the authors of the test.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to Marcos in I want to know why Eset security products are so fast.
There are many reasons for that, not just one. One of the things we do is that the resource-intensive code emulation is done once and the result is cached for future use so advanced heuristics doesn't have to emulate files each time they are accesses and scanned. Then there are other safe caching mechanisms to ensure that files are re-scanned only when needed (e.g. after module updates), trusted / whitelisted files are scanned less frequently, etc. which also positively affects performance.
fabioquadros_ gave kudos to PassingBy in The PC Security Channel [TPSC] vs Eset 2020
Not too long ago we were here, in another thread, discussing about the previous test from this very same guy who gave ESET appalling scores with a major war of words ongoing on this place for weeks. That was when i joined the ESET family and this forum. Because while everyone was fighting based on the opinions of this guy, what i did was to download ESET, then set it up with maximum settings, including the HIPS rules which i added manually from an ESET guide and, that is my understanding, later on were added by ESET as standard in their product.
The result was me leaving another product after over 15 years of non stop usage (they removed the spam protection to an extent) and buying a 3 years subscription for ESET with a special offer in my country of residence.
I never had issues with the previous product. I had never issues with the current one, with only minor complaints related to small details. It might be to soon to be too positive. I don't know. However the bottom line is: Try things by yourself. Reviews are entertaining, they can be a rough guide to what you are looking for. But there is no substitute for your experience.
ESET is working fine for me. I only consider their notifications an utter pain in the neck. I had to mute them. And some of their threats are not explained in the proper way. I am happy that i can change whatever i want and that i can set rules by myself if needed. It surely is not a suite for the lazy. But it is a good product, if one takes some time to learn how to use it and is not scared of asking questions.
The support in the forum is overall good as well. The previous product had an appalling support.
And did try many other products together with ESET. I threw all of them away. Some slowed down my PC, others had too much bloatware in them, some were oversimplified and didn't allow me to have a good control (no notifications at all in those...as opposed to ESET, with worse nightmares as you don't know what's going on underneath).
Try things yourself! We'll be here in a few months with this guy giving ESET a lower score and more arguments arising, most probably.