tbsky

If I double-click the exported 3072 bits certificate at win7 and try to import it, it will show "password incorrect" and can not continue. at win10 double-click the 3072 bit certificate and there is no problem to import it.

I don't know how Eset use these certificates. I assume the "Agent certificate" was used by agent installation, so I try to export it from 3 servers: 1. oldest server: 2048 bit rsa with sha1 signature => win7 accept it. 2. server last year (eset-protect 9.0) : 2048 bit rsa with sha256 signature => win7 accept it. 3. server last month(eset-protect 9.1): 3072 bit rsa with sha256 signature => win7 refuse it. so "3072 bit" seems hit the problem. how can I make win7/eset agent accept it? I already installed a hundred win10 machines with the certificate. I don't want to reinstall these win10 to use a new certificate if possible.

Hi: the log didn't said the reason. but after simplify the procedure, I found the problem seems related to the certificate. the brand new eset-protect 9.1 will create many certificate automatically during installation. and windows 7 seems didn't like it. I test it on a full-patched win 7. if I click the agent-x64.msi and doing a server assisted installation, it will complain about the certificate when I click "accept certificate?" (see attached picture). on the other hand, if I change the server to another upgraded eset-protect 9.1 (so the certificate was created several years ago), then the assisted installation works fine.

sorry there is another ip address: > host download.eset.com download.eset.com is an alias for download.gtm.eset.com. download.gtm.eset.com is an alias for eset-dlm-cdn.azureedge.net. eset-dlm-cdn.azureedge.net is an alias for eset-dlm-cdn.afd.azureedge.net. eset-dlm-cdn.afd.azureedge.net is an alias for star-azureedge-prod.trafficmanager.net. star-azureedge-prod.trafficmanager.net is an alias for dual.part-0011.t-0009.t-msedge.net. dual.part-0011.t-0009.t-msedge.net is an alias for part-0011.t-0009.t-msedge.net. part-0011.t-0009.t-msedge.net has address 13.107.213.39 part-0011.t-0009.t-msedge.net has address 13.107.246.39 part-0011.t-0009.t-msedge.net has IPv6 address 2620:1ec:46::39 part-0011.t-0009.t-msedge.net has IPv6 address 2620:1ec:bdf::39

maybe there many servers. the server I use is: > ping download.eset.com PING part-0011.t-0009.t-msedge.net (13.107.213.39) 56(84) bytes of data. > openssl s_client -connect download.eset.com:443 CONNECTED(00000003) depth=2 C = US, O = DigiCert Inc, OU = www.digicert.com, CN = DigiCert Global Root CA verify return:1 depth=1 C = US, O = DigiCert Inc, OU = www.digicert.com, CN = Thawte RSA CA 2018 verify return:1 depth=0 CN = download.eset.com verify error:num=10:certificate has expired notAfter=Jul 29 23:59:59 2022 GMT verify return:1 depth=0 CN = download.eset.com notAfter=Jul 29 23:59:59 2022 GMT verify return:1

hi: I want to download eset product. but browser shows download.eset.com certificate expired certificate Validity Not Before: Jun 28 00:00:00 2021 GMT Not After: Jul 29 23:59:59 2022 GMT

May I ask what's the location of installation log? I think maybe there are some hints for what happened..

Hi: I create agent+eav all-in-one installer at eset-protect 9.1.2301.0. but the package can not install at win7 (agent install error 1603). but when I try create the same package (same agent version, same eav version) at another host (same 9.1.2301.0 version). the package installed fine at the same win7 machine. the two host are different OS (rhel 9.0 vs rhel 8.6) and different java version (java 11 vs java 1.8). what debug/log message should I check to find out the reason?

JAVA 11 LTS is supported until September 2026. I am pretty sure eset-protect 9.1 won't be supported at that time. so please don't mark the component as outdated when its life is longer then the eset product itself. it is very strange.

that's too bad. it means currently endpoint 8.0 warning is out of control although is it still usable until November. as an administrator I know when is the good time to upgrade the product. maybe this time the mistake can not be recovered. I really hope next time Eset won't make false alarm to our users.

Hi: some of our users are using endpoint 8.0. we plan to upgrade them when 9.1 is mature. but users complained that eset give red alarm about the 8.0 product will be outdated at 2022 November. I check the default notification policy and the "Product Outdated" showing is disabled. is there other policy to disable the red alarm? or I need to force the default policy to make it work? attach the default policy picture.

Hi: I tried to change the policy to block read/write, and this time Eset can prevent writing. that's good. I change back to block write, then program can write normally. (windows still can not do format). how can I open a support ticket?

Hi: today I want to test device control under windows. my version is endpoint 9.0.2032.6. I set a "usb read only policy". policy applied and I reboot the pc. I input a sd card to usb card reader, windows hint me that I need to "format the card", and Eset hint me that usb is read only. I told windows to format the card, windows told me permission denied. that's good. than I try to use sd card write tool like sdimager to write data directly to sd card. Eset hint me that usb is read only. but the tool still write data to sd card correctly. that's not good. is the behavior expetcted? it seems Eset device control can only control basic windows operations but not other programs.

that's strange. according to your words, v8.1.2031 at August is the latest stable build and released over a month, so it should have PCU. it seems there is "standard" release and "LTS" release. maybe for some reason ESET doesn't want to tag the life of each release. but it is a useful information for most users.

so you mean if you block Eset client to Eset servers (except port 53535), then it will work fine? that's interesting.

great news. hope we can enjoy Eset like air without feeling it soon.

this is really a good news for us. although we use eset protect to manage the workstation, we can not afford that every single command can only be triggered via administrator. there should be things which belong to users. we administrator only want to do policy works. I don't mind to wait for 1 year or even 2 years. just hope that endpoint linux can be a real usable product.

maybe you are using version 8.1? check the forum you can find similar problems with 8.1. it seems a version strategy. this time version 8.0 is very smooth and little things changed. in fact I think it should be named version 7.9. in contrast version 8.1 changes a lot of things so it should be named version 8.0. and we all know that we don't use X.0 software. we are still waiting real version 8.1.

sorry I don't have time to do it now. I try firefox and chrome to download 32bit/64bit all-in-one installers . result is the same. but if I move the file from quarantine to outside and let eset to scan the file, it reports the file is clean. if the problem is still there after a few days, I will use ESET Log Collector and report.

hi: I am using a win10 with EAV 8.0.8028.0. I try to create a new all-in-one installer for EAV 8.0.8028.0 for our new customer. I am surprised that Eset detect the all-in-one install as "Blocked object" and quarntine it.

Hi: it may work in an ideal environment which all the PCs are management centralized. but sometimes it is not the situation. some of our customers sell specialized linux pc controllers to manage bigger machines. they have been asked to install anti-virus software before shipping to prove the system is safe. normally the machines work in a closed network. but they still require anti-virus software for the second/third defense although the virus-database may not update frequently. ESET is our friend for the situation. hope the V4 virus-db can still be maintained after 2021-August.

Oh. never thought about windows. I always use linux to host ERA since v6. in fact it is one of the reason I encourage our customers to migrate to ESET endpoint. it is a good thing that ESET can take care about linux environment. BTW, it is not so good that ESET abandoned desktop gui linux version since V4. many of our customers need it. we need to find a replacement for it now.

Hi: I was using mysql-connector-odbc 8.0.18 with ESMC/Protect at one server over 1 year. I didn't encounter strange things like previous ESMC versions. maybe I am lucky or maybe newer versions of ESMC/Protect fix something. could you re-test newer version of mysql-connector-odbc? I think we should not stay at mysql-connector-odbc 8.0.17 forever as document said.

Hi: ERA->ESMC->Eset Protect. maybe we should change back to the simplest ERA name. it's not a good sign. please don't play stupid name-changing games like microsoft windows/office

thanks a lot for the hint! although it seems strange that I need to put the msi file to some other place to make it work. I think I need sperarate 32bit/64bit versions right? what will happen when 7.3.2039.1(Japanese version) get upgrade task to 7.3.2041? I want to make sure before doing these kind of upgrade...