Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Mike

  1. I agree, it has been frustrating to keep pushing my Mac users back a month at a time, to now see the date for Firewall support in ESET Endpoint Security has been pushed back to March by ESET! Many of them are itching to upgrade to Big Sur.

    As a non-Mac user myself, I'm now left trying to decide whether to let my Mac users now upgrade to Big Sur without Firewall, or make them wait even longer to install Big Sur until Firewall is released by ESET. Would be interested to hear what others are planning to do now with this latest news... 


    Also interested to hear about the beta too...

  2. 16 hours ago, Marcos said:

    There will be another v6 with support of system extensions.

    Thanks Marcos. WIll keep an eye out for that.

    What about ESMC client v7.0.447.0 (eg the other half of my question)? Is that OK, or does that need a newer version for compatibility with next MacOS version too?

    Might be worth an overview help page which has compatibility for all ESET products and lists the minimum versions that will work with next MacOS without problems. That way we can see at a glance the latest status, (eg currently wait for the next product version) and then when that product is released, it will state the exact version that is minimum required. Otherwise each time a new version comes out, we will be left asking the same question over and over again (in the forums and on phone to support etc), asking is this the version the one that works, or are we still waiting (eg like the change from v6.8 to v6.9).



  3. A Mac user is still getting the same warning on Eset Endpoint AntiVirus v6.9.60.0

    I assumed this would be fixed in the v6.9 product line, as you said it would be fixed in the next version after v6.8 (or do you mean the v7 product line?)

    Equally, whilst I'm assuming that the warning is coming from Eset Endpoint, I guess there is an equal chance it is coming from the ESMC client (which is on v7.0.447.0).

    Any info on what are the minimum versions of both Endpoint and ESMC client are required for use with the next version of MacOS would be much appreciated.

  4. 21 hours ago, HSW said:

    4. dont have a testserver for this, i read there was a problem that V6 client policys not work with EMC till all clients have V7 agent -> is this fixed?

    normaly i upgrade my server if this makes problems -> restore but when all clients get problems i wait till all is proved. If upgrade server without touching clients possible i could test some install clients.

    @HSW Are you talking about ESMC or Endpoint Security here? (I was referring to Endpoint Security & AntiVirus in this thread, but you raise an interesting point)

    I'm presuming that EES and EEA v7 will work fine with either ERAv6  or with ESMC v7, but I realised I haven't checked that specifically.

    Ideally at this stage I'd roll out some EESv7 test machines, whilst I remain on ERAv6.  I'd then look at a switch to ESMC v7 at a later date, when I have more time.

    @everyone else.

    Thanks for the input and replies so far. Makes me more confident to invest the time in trialling EES and EEA v7 for a few machines at this end. Still worth others replying too though, as I'm sure I won't be the only one with this question, and the more who answer, the better a picture everyone gets of product readiness for the primetime! :)

    Thanks again


  5. As a small charity, we have very limited resources to test new products internally.

    Therefore I was wondering how other are finding v7 of EES and EEA? (ideally I'd have asked via a poll, but that isn't allowed for mere mortals!)

    So how about this for a poll substitute.

    What is your experience of Endpoint v7 products?

    1. Great. (Using it with no problems)
    2. OK. (Using it with only minor problems.)
    3. Tested. (Tried it, but having major problems, so not ready for widespread use.)
    4. Not tested yet.
    5. Other...

    Thinking you can just reply with the number that matches your experience, OR if you prefer: write the number and also a comment to explain more.

    Hoping this will help others quickly get a sense of the state of the new versions.


  6. Perfect! I fully understand those dates are best guess right now, but that is really useful guidelines which will help me plan! Thanks.

    In terms of functionality, are we basically talking a cloud version of ERA? (eg similar functionally to local ERA install, but installed on ESET's servers as a cloud service)?

    Are there are known feature gaps that come with this cloud version compared to current local install of ERA?

  7. Thanks for the help!

    Do you mean I create two policies:

    • One to send the settings I want (but which unfortunately locks those settings from being changed)
    • A second less restrictive policy which I then apply afterwards which leaves the things I set in the first policy in place, but then allows local editing

    Is that what you mean?

    If so, do the two policies have to be manually set to the first policy, then after it has applied manually remove it switched to the second policy? (Or, can I apply both at once using the policy order to set and then unlock?)

    Also, in the old days there were config files (possibly .xml files? but I forget now) that you could apply to configure a client with sensible defaults, but I can't find this any more... presumably these were dropped? Or am I just missing something?


  8. Hi,

    I've only recently started exploring Policies and I'm finding them confusing and too restrictive. Am I missing the point, or is there another way to set configuration for Endpoint Security & Antivirus products using ERA 6.5 but in such a way that I also allow local changes to be made as well. Currently if I set anything via the Policy (say a rule to allow Skype through the firewall - although why this doesn't just work out of the box is beyond me!), that also locks the firewall so that the user can add their own exceptions. 

    What I want to do is set a sensible set of default values for various features, but also for some of them still allow the user to over-ride this setting if needed.

    Is there another way to do this, or is it really all or nothing (locked or not-set-at-all)?



  9. Even very vague and non-committed time-frames are useful.

    I'm in the process of moving all our stuff here out to the Cloud, which makes sense for us as we are a charity and get the cloud stuff for free. However it looks like I'm going to need to maintain an onsite server and hybrid setup just so that ERA will run! Which is a lot of admin work to maintain for that one function.... equally I couldn't contemplate managing all our users remotely without ERA, so am in a tricky situation. No point using Azure for it, as that would just cost us dollars compared to hardware onsite we already paid for... and would still need the OS keeping up-to-date etc.  ERA as a service in the cloud would be what we need. A vague timeframe would allow us to make plans.

    eg Are we talking: weeks, months or years away from being ready?

    (for another charity I volunteer for, they jumped off ESET ERA last year because they had no server to run it on, and they'd probably jump back in a flash once Cloud is ready, but their renewal is coming up this month so they need to decide soon)

    Hope you can give us some vague info without committing to anything. (I understand the ultimate answer will be "when it is ready for the production use!")



  10. A variety of issues. Each machine different (all on v6.4.246 though):

    EES = Firewall blocking Skype on automatic. Rules set to allow it, but user has still since turned firewall off. (Waiting for update from user)

    EES = Another user had "wheel of death" and browsing issues with EES installed. Took lots of hassles to remove EES. ERA 6.5 hasn't reported home for a month. User completely fed up of ESET. (Have a remote support session with ESET tomorrow to explore.)

    EEA = Mac has problems with Eset for a while, but is on latest 6.4.246 and user keeps disabling to get machine working correctly. (again waiting for more info to understand issues_


    All machine are remote to me, and I'm not a Mac user, so not my area of expertise. Just aware I don't get the same problems with Eset on Windows. I certainly agree I'm getting less issues with v6.4 compared to past versions, but still frustrating to have these issues ongoing (other Macs have dropped off ERA and am waiting to even find out why).


    Was just interested that others were reporting Mac users turning ESET off, and wondering if it was a common experience of others, and making sure that issues were addressed rather than hidden behind locking ESET to remain on regardless. (Of course it could just be because Mac users like to do things their own way....)

  11. I'd be wanting to find out why they are closing EEA down. If they are having issues with it slowing their Macs down to be unusable, or other similar issues, then blocking them from turning it off might stop them from closing EEA... but it will potentially greatly increase the user's frustrations!!! And maybe even leave them unable to user their Mac.

    We are having various issues with Endpoint on Macs, and as a result I also find that users keep turning it off. This to me suggests there is a deeper problem with Endpoint on Macs (a mix of both EEA & EES here). I don't see these same issues on PC versions.

    I don't have any solutions, but I'd be interested to hear if others are seeing widespread problems with EEA or EES on Macs and if there are settings we should try to make it work better? I'll also report back if we find anything useful from interrogating my users.

  12. My guess is that it happened because the agent is designed to be upgraded using the Remote Administration upgrade task (it is called something like that), and because it was a fresh install (even though it was installed on top of the old agent), it has been detected as a fresh computer.


    I can't find the instructions for updating right now, but if you hunt around the knowledgebase you should find what you are looking for. You basically run an upgrade on the Remote Administration as though you are going to upgrade the ERA server itself , but you select all the computers you want to get the new agent deployed to, and it upgrades each machine in the list to the latest agent.


    Good luck



  13. We've had problems with Eset Mail Security for Exchange v6.2 so it would appear not all v6.2 products are fixed yet.... (although Eset are yet to respond to my thread, so as yet unconfirmed) but turning off Protocol Filtering appears to have worked for me on EMSXv6.2 although it'll take another week of no reboots to be sure.


    Protocol Filtering is in the Web & Email section of the Advanced Settings. If you go to the Main Header for this, there is an On / Off slider button for this feature. (I also disabled Outlook Integration on mine in the email section - since it is on a Mail Server no-one runs Outlook on the Server itself).


    Other thread with Server Crashes on Eset File Security for Windows Servers v6

    My Thread with Server Crashes on Eset Mail Security for Exchange v6.2


    Good Luck.



  14. Because I was nervous about installing the Hotfix without proof that it:

    a) works on SBS2008, and

    b) was likely to help the problem anyway;

    .... instead I've disabled the Protocol Scanning features for Web and Email in EMSXv6.2 (as I don't think they were enabled on the previous EMSXv4.5) and that was an alternative solution offered by Marcos in the other thread:


    Alternatively you could disable protocol filtering to prevent the bug in Windows Filtering Platform from manifesting. Normally this shouldn't be a problem as servers shouldn't be used to browse websites or receive emails with the exception of terminal servers.



    I'll have to wait now to check whether that has helped my server regain stability or not.


    I am surprised though, as the Eset KB article suggests that the latest products shouldn't need to use this hotfix:



    Important!Server Operating Systems: This issue has been resolved with the release of ESET File Security for Microsoft Windows Server (EFSW).


    Yet here we are with EMSXv6.2 potentially suffering this problem, (although not yet confirmed!).


    Would love to be sure we have this solved, and know that we have disabled the correct bits... and are therefore still secure and fully protected (I don't want to have reduced protection by mistake), but also stable again (my users don't want any more outages!!).


    Thanks in advance for your help



  15. Hi,


    I'm having problems with our SBS2008 since we installed Eset Mail Security for Exchange v6.2 (6.2.10009.0) last week, where the server repeatedly has become unresponsive and required a hard power off with the power button. (at least 4 times in the last week at random times on a previously very stable server)


    I have been unable to find the culprit for the problems, so can't prove it is EMSX v6.2 that is at fault, although that is the main thing that has changed on the server recently. (The other being some Windows Updates which could also be the cause).


    I would roll back to EMSX v4.5 to test stability on that version, except that I installed v6.2 because I was having problems with v4.5 where it had stopped scanning emails completely and was pouring spam and viruses through to my users untouched, which wasn't acceptable!


    I've just increased the RAM today from 8GB to 16GB in case it was short of RAM.... but I very much doubt it, as we really aren't stretching this box (humming along saying it is using just 5.4GB of 16GB at the moment). When the system freezes it seems to be CPU bound not RAM bound.


    The SBS2008 is running in a Hyper-V virtual machine.


    I've seen this thread concerning a potential hotfix for Windows which might fix it, although it says this problem is sorted in ESWF, so I'd have assumed it was also fixed in EMSX v6.2 too, but this isn't necessarily true. Also the Eset KB mentions this applies to SBS2008, but the Microsoft Hotfix doesn't list SBS2008 as one of the supported systems.


    Also concerning me is that this problem wasn't apparent on this server when I was running EMSX v4.5 even though that is supposedly one of the systems which would need the MS Hotfix.


    Is there an easy way to prove from some logs (either Windows or Eset) or diagnostic routine whether this Microsoft hotfix will help me, or prove what application is causing the system to freeze (prove definitively whether it is ESMX or something else causing the problems). My users have faced too many reboots in the last week already (I gave the system three reboots trying to fix v4.5 last week, one reboot whilst installing v6.2 and four more to solve system freezes), so I am not keen to start changing system setup further unless I know it will help.


    Thanks in advance for your help,



  16. I'll start my own thread to discuss my server as that would appear to be more helpful than cluttering this thread with a potentially separate problem. But I'll leave discussion of this Microsoft Hotfix to this thread, so that info all stays together:-


    Is this Microsoft Hotfix definitely safe to install on SBS2008? It isn't on the list of applicable systems on the Microsoft Hotfix page.

  17. Hi,

    I have seen Eset Mail Security for Microsoft Exchange (EMSX) v6.2 is in the Beta forum, where I was asking about release date.

    I know see that it is available for download on your main website and is mentioned as supported by the new ERAv6.2..... but it isn't announced yet in the sticky threads here...

    So I was wanting to know is this officially released now, or is it still in beta.... or is it half way between these, sort-of having a soft launch maybe?

    The reason I ask, is that I had a nightmare day with EMSX v4.5 yesterday, which resulted in 24 hours of no virus or spam protection for my users email. In the end in desperation I decided to install v6.2 from your website, which has worked to solve my problem... but I am obviously concerned to know if I am now running fully released software, or a beta release? (as it changes the way I trust and monitor the program).


    In other news, I'm liking lots of the new features, and detection rate seems good, but there seem to be no fine tune controls over the detection levels which surprised me. Too early to say what our non-detection rate is like(how many spams slipped through), but I've not seen a false positive in the quarantine yet! (which is promising - although it has only been 24hours, so early days)


    Talking of which, the new webpage based quarantine is awesome! I put in our external domain url (used for Outlook Web Access), but with /quarantine instead of /owa, and it just worked! Even down to using the same GeoTrust certificate automatically so users can now login using their domain credentials to a secure spam quarantine webpage (even from outside our organisation) and release/delete just their own emails.... and if an administrator logs in they can see the lot for releasing/deleting! What a great feature!


    I'd love some discussion on configuring the spam features on EMSX v6.2 though, to hear of others' experiences, both good and bad. Ours opinion so far is a guarded:


            "great so far, but I'll be keeping a nervous close eye on it until it has proven itself"


    What about you?





  18. I understand that the first impression after jumping from ERA v5 to ERA v6 is not good which is understandable as ERA 6 is a brand new generation built from scratch and based on users' requests. It is more robust and complex compared to its previous versions, however, virtual appliances make it easy to deploy. The new version offers possibilities that were previously impossible to accomplish, e.g. you can configure a policy that will automatically disconnect a client from network if an unresolved threat is detected and connect it back once a full disk scan has run (automatically) and the threat has been cleaned.

    Marcos. Glad to hear this info. Helps us better appreciate the vision for the changes. Would love to hear more of this stuff, as it helps us understand the long term goal, and therefore endure the short term pain whilst we get there!

    Looking forward to finding time to install v6.2



  • Create New...