jetspeedz
-
Posts
31 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by jetspeedz
-
-
Is there a way to disable this? It's just an annoying step that serves no benefit. Also it does not go away even after hours of no threat found
-
I finally upgraded from Smart Security 7 to the newest internet security.
On Smart Security 7 I could easily click on the Eset icon in they tray and "Pause Protection" it would come up with a window defaulting to 10 minutes which was perfect. I would still get notification as usual if a threat was found etc when protection was turned on as expected.
With this new Internet Security there is an extra step which I'm hoping can be eliminated or disabled b/c it serves no purpose other than an unnecessary confirmation box.
When I select Pause Protection it comes up with the "Threat found Recently ... disabling protection... yada yada yada prompt. I have to select Apply than the 10 minute standard pop up appears.
Is there a way to get rid of this unnecessary prompt, without affecting other normal notifications?
-
-
-
-
-
Still didn't answer the question about the KB.
That site is not entirely accurate. Also you forget drivers are a big thing and not all MFG have updated drivers on older models so that a lone is a show stopper. I have no intentions of upgrading the systems running fine on 7 with interactive FW and HW FW (pfsense) before it even reaches the nodes.
My guess is I'm stuck with the older version which is fine. was hoping someone had more info on the KB
-
-
I have an older laptop windows 7 (SP1) x86, which can't be upgraded to win 10 as the hardware will not even support it. Currently on Eset Smart Security 4 (yes older laptop) runs just fine no issues with light footprint.
Long story short was hoping i could install the latest version of Internet security and I get this error
"eset security is no longer supported on your outdated version of microsoft windows"
Is there no way to install a newer version of Eset on older win 7 OS?
There was an article about having 2 different KB but not sure if that will work and not wanting to install anything that can cause or break other things.
thanks
-
Wishful thinking, no Win 10 system can touch my tweaked Win 7 system. With more iterations there is more bloat, telemetry and junk. Not to say I don't have Win 10 systems but no intention of ever upgrading the 7 boxes.
-
thanks I believe you have the same access to the hips logs as well in older version i know you do in 7 and 4. I initially started this thread about alerts but it appears there is no quick fix. I know i can find out what is causing it with some debug tools but b/c i can't repeat the issue it would take a lot of effort to run and monitor these kernel debug tools so likely I will upgrade to v12 b/c of the resources improvements.
-
13 hours ago, peteyt said:
I can't remember if 11 was a hog but the problem is a lot of those that used it and complained probably didn't send in any logs. Eset will always try to fix issues if it can see them
I did a quick search and found some threads about it, what ever issues were reported are moot with the changes in v12 now.
8 hours ago, itman said:Eset kernel and firewall processes for ver. 12.1.34 use approx. 90K of memory on my Win 10 x(64) 1809 build as shown in the below screen shot. Assumed is memory usage will vary depending on Win OS ver. used.
That is about about double what Marcos posted, still better than v7 which is promising. I wonder what the OS was Marcos was using. Also what type of hypervisor did he create the VM on and if that makes a difference for memory allocation.
8 hours ago, itman said:Getting back to the original Eset alert elapsed time display, I couldn't find a user manual on the web for ver. 7 Smart Security. But I did find one for ver. 8 which I assume is the same in regards to alert elapsed time display:
https://download.eset.com/manuals/eset_ess_8_userguide_enu.pdf
Note the setting highlighted in red. In the "Configure notifications" section should be a setting which alert display time can be increased in value.
Alternatively, you can just uncheck the option highlighted in blue which will keep alerts displayed until they are manually closed.
Thanks I'm familiar with this option in v7 as well but its not the for the HIPS/FW alerts, not sure what the formal name of the alert window is but the notification window near the tray can also be controlled in the same area in v7.
-
14 hours ago, Marcos said:
Well, not really close to v4
I know my v4 is not anywhere near that. Than again I don't use all the features either.
-
That is impressive, you have convinced me to test v12, if I'm not mistaking and i'll have to check an old air gapped system running v4 but those numbers are close if not better than v4. Thanks for posting the info.
-
You have peaked my interest, apparently v11 was a hog, perhaps v12 is improved. As you know egui was never really the issue its the erkn that is the hog and has gotten bigger with subsequent releases. What is the idle ram allocation of the two services for v12? Assume proxy egui and erkn are running? is there any other services running? I'm assuming if its checking UEFI there is no some overhead for boot times too. Again features not everyone will use or need. Smart compact and efficient protection is where ESET needs to focus going back to the older version philosophy that put i on the map compared to others. proxy gui is a good start but who know what else was added in to make it feature rich.
-
Still does not address the issue at hand.
As long as Eset continues to provide updates it serves its purpose. If you ask me ESS4 is even better as its lighter on system resources.
I'm not a novice user, don't need ransomware protection, all systems are backed up and imaged with disaster recovery options, interactive firewall with HIPS takes care of just about everything the new version covers including network attacks etc... I find as programs evolve they get more intrusive and heavier on system resources. Going from ESS4 to ESS7 proved just that as it uses more memory and I can only imagine what ESS12 uses vs the features provided.
In any case it appears the experts here are not able to provide any feedback to resolve the problem. Will have to debug the software myself i guess when I have more time and add tracers to capture what is going on... will post what I find when I have time to dig into it.
-
Can't create a video as the window is only open for a second or two max.
I have no intention of upgrading from 7.x when it works fine.
As i suspected there is no way to view the logs or change the notification timeout setting. Shame.
-
I wish that was the case, its not. Is there a log somewhere i can view manually? This is quite irritating b/c the pop up is quite random.
-
I get this smart security what I believe is a FW or HIPS alert that pops up asking me if i want to allow/deny b/c I have set interactive mode. The problem is the alert come up and only stays there for about 2 seconds before i can select any options or even reach for the screen shot keyboard. Looking at all the logs I don't even see where it shows up, I don't believe you can view any of the logs in the GUI that will display all the FW and HIPS alerts.
Question: is there a way to make the window stay up longer. If not where can i find the logs that will tell me what was actually reported? I have smart security 7.x
Thanks
-
Interesting, on my systems win 7 x64 and x86 they are about 16MB after boot and slow climb up never exceeding 68MB. I'll test v7 with jumbo frames and if there are no firewall issues with it i'll do some memory and cpu analysis and post back here.
thanks
-
Versions older than v5 use ThreatSense which evolved to LiveGrid first incorporated in v5. One of the main differences is that LiveGrid keeps a local database with cloud information about files and thus can improve performance by safely skipping whitelisted (e.g. popular) files.
So like i suspected it does not directly affect system footprint, but rather help in improving scan times using "Cloud-powered scanning" when enabled.
From what I have gathered the cpu/ram usage is the same between the different versions. The jumbo frame support is something I will test when I upgrade.
Cheers
-
I'm going on a limb here to say he meant something else but time will tell
cheers
-
I'm beginning to wonder the same thing about the responses? Comparisons of LiveGrid and Threatsense have been made inaccurately which I pointed out above, yet the claim made still has not been specifically answered.
I'm the least bit interested in LiveGrid/Threatsense! I'm however interested in the claim made by the Marcos with respect to system footprint. It appears to me there is no clear answer b/c the claim is false. As i explained the same system updates used by v4,5,6,7 come from analysis sent to ESET by LiveGrid & Threatsense, so how is it that LiveGrid makes v7 of Eset lighter in terms of system footprint?
"2, v7 should be even lighter in terms of system footprint thanks to LiveGrid."
-
I beg to differ, the root of these two is to send information back to ESET to help provide better system updates which determine what files are Scanned or omitted.
No, not only. One can also get real-time cloud detections from LiveGrid like when you execute a file.
Like "Blocked object" , "Suspicious object" etc...
So LiveGrid can come into play in real-time as well.
What does real-time cloud detection have to do with the claim made by Marcos? If a system is segregated to the cloud again this becomes a moot point. In one respect evertime an executable is executed internet bandwith and a delay is accounted for to check against a cloud for the file hash. The delay and tradeoff between protection is a whole different topic on its own. Please stay focused!
"2, v7 should be even lighter in terms of system footprint thanks to LiveGrid."
How to tunr off notification disabling protection
in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium
Posted
Copy thanks, would be nice if an option was added to disable this alert.