Jump to content

KPS

Members
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    Germany
  1. Hi! I think, I am aware of how it works, now. I just disagree with the "very small chance", that two different companys are are getting the same malicious documents in a small time frame. Example: Malicious mails start to use more and more "links" instead of "attachments". The links are dead within the first minutes to avoid to be detected by gateway-scanners. In that case, I would wish to get the update via live-grid directly, when any installation with EDTD detected the downloaded file. About confidential samples: It would be sufficient to share the hashes of all malicious files.
  2. That's sad. EDTD would be much more attractive, if also small companys could benefit from the samples of thousands of other people through push-updates of infected hashes. Something like "LiveGrid Premium" That would be a great sales pitch.
  3. Hi! So, using EDTD "passively" is stupid - right? There is no benefit over "normal" LiveGrid about the delay after detection. Thank you for your help! KPS
  4. Hi! I am quite confused about the real benefit of the EDTD license. The docs are not clear in one important point: WHO is getting the detection information and WHEN. Customer A is using ETDR and submitts a malware-file. --> Customer A is getting the response and all of his endpoints are protected, when the result is available WHEN will Customer B's ESET Endpoints detect THAT file as malware, if he owns a EDTD-license (witout submitting the file)? WHEN will Customer C's ESET Endpoints detect THAT file as malware, if he does not own a EDTD-license? Same question, different wording: Does a Customer get ANY benefit from the EDTD-license, if he does not submit any samples? Thank you for your help KPS
×
×
  • Create New...