bbahes

No one replied so I was forced to implement quick fix and use ESET Authentication Server for zone authentication. This works both on LAN and WLAN. Also, since I'm testing v6 virtual appliance, can someone from ESET staff answer, is there a ESET Authentication Server version available for virtual appliance or do I have to have licensed Windows Server just to use ESET Authentication Server, given the problem I have with zone authentication. Regards.

This happens very often in my company. We have clients that have notebooks. In one part of company they are connected with LAN, but when they move to conference hall they are connected to WLAN. There are also clients that connect via VPN and they get IP in different subnet. Exactly what I wanted to describe. Most people here have MacBooks and Thunderbolt display. When moving around the office, they are using Wifi. When connected to the monitor, it's using the ethernet interface. When connected from home, it's through a VPN tunnel. In mac, I can choose which network adapter will update DNS by running this command : dsconfigad -restrictDDNS "en0, en1, en2" where en0, en1 are my interfaces. It prevents virtual network interfaces or VPN connections to be registered in my DNS thus making the computer unreachable from hostname. There is the same type of configuration in Windows to prevent a network connection from registering its IP on the DNS server. Could these settings be used so that ESET inventories all network interfaces that would normally register an IP to the DNS server? Thanks both of you. It is reported as bug/improvement as it may require more work. We have one more question: how do you use rogue computers list in ERA? From this report it seems you regularly monitor list of new machines, is it correct? We expected it to be used primarily before first deployment in network and that is why we missed this issue. I myself only test v6 for possible production use. However I don't plan to use rogue detection feature. Two reasons. One, we don't have deployment tool that could benefit the list of computers, second, no unknown client is allowed in our production VLAN. The only possible reason I could see it in use is for additional layer of protection, if someone really tries to connect rogue client. Our plan is to deploy agents manually and then push endpoint product on clients once agents connect to ERA.

In documentation "Installation, Upgrade and Migration Guide" REV. 3/29/2016 page 148 you say that Apache HTTP Proxy is located under /var/log/httpd yet I found it only in /opt/apache/logs in virtual appliance. Is this bug in documentation?

We will try PCU update in future. Thank you for this information. Regarding old Microsoft certificates, don't they generate new ones? If you support v5 until Dec 2018 why don't you sign them with new ones?

This happens very often in my company. We have clients that have notebooks. In one part of company they are connected with LAN, but when they move to conference hall they are connected to WLAN. There are also clients that connect via VPN and they get IP in different subnet.

Thanks for this info. Is this move to force v5 users to switch to v6? Can you please confirm part about signatures, please?

Hi! I am having problem with Eset Endpoint Security 5.0.2260 and Trusted zone detection. We have several rules that apply to Trusted zone we configured (subnet+default gateway+dhcp+dns). Things work well when client is connected to LAN (/24 subnet) but when connected to WiFi (same physical network, same /24 subnet) rules that have Trusted zone as don't work. I've also created additional Trusted zone for WiFi, filling "When wireless SSID is:" and checking "When connection is secured", but no effect. How can I force client to detect Trusted zone correctly?

is there any ERA latest version has been released? The latest version of ERA is 5.3.33. However, it won't help you as your existing Endpoint clients won't be able to verify the new package signature. Use push install instead of an upgrade client task. I'm left with option to walk around 60 clients and do manual upgrade. Can you confirm that future upgrades will work via upgrade client task? ERA: 5.3.33.0 EEA: 5.0.2254.0 EES: 5.0.2254.0

This is something we are also evaluating since we are growing in number of clients that move notebooks from company to home to partner company etc...

Have you tried downloading fresh installation from eset.com ? I used to have this problem with some clients when I launched installation over WiFi. I had to remove product with uninstaller and copy installation localy.

Could this be considered as feature request?

We don't use Exchange and Endpoint Security, but sometime ago we had same problem with "not receiving emails". In our case it was Intrusion Prevention System on router that blocked connections to mail server, based on policy he updates daily. Did you try disabling EES and see if then works? Also if you use ERA, check that policy on personal firewall is set to automatic, otherwise you will have to enter rules for Exchange to pass through firewall. You might want to run Wireshark to see if connection is really made.

hxxp://support.eset.com/kb2951/?locale=en_US

We have tried upgrading EEA v5 to EES v5 and stumbled on same problem. Since we can't use push we are forced to install manually... Is this going to be fixed in future? Please clarify why push install ain't an option for you. Most of ports and services Push install requires are disabled on clients and we don't have Windows Domain in place.

We have tried upgrading EEA v5 to EES v5 and stumbled on same problem. Since we can't use push we are forced to install manually... Is this going to be fixed in future?

Is this resolved?

This is really welcome feature! Thanks!

Is there a plan to detect and list by netbios/dns name like in v5?

Isn't this enough to rename computer in ERAv6? hxxp://support.eset.com/kb3717/?locale=en_US

Than you for your effort to listen me. I know that I can make my own dashboard that would show most if not all information like Clients tab did in v5. But maybe I didn't voice out real problem. It's web interface. It's very slow and even with all customization of dashboards (to make it look like in v5) it's very non intuitive. Non intuitive for me means I have to click and wait for HTTP response. Maybe it's something that older system administrators are not used to, but I prefer performance over look. If you could give back to us management console I would welcome v6 in very short time, and may I try to guess that this is your new project? I also understand this new agent - product - server relationship and move to Linux. These are all welcome things. Things that make us wait how v6 develops. However what I don't accept is reason you ditched mirror server. This new thing with Apache as proxy is not very attractive. What I liked in v5 is that I could clear update server and download fresh antivirus definitions and with very few clicks push it to clients and be sure that client got update from my mirror server. They would very shortly report update to console. In v6 I "give" control to clients to proxy to your servers and pray they all download what they need and hope I don't have to look in numerous logs on client or server if something goes wrong.

This is the most important sentence I have read about v6 and it should be pinned in your topic list. Client list table was, and still is most important aspect of security management in my view. But you could ask any system administrator here. I need to be able to look at client list and quickly filter that list and see problematic client. That's it! Why would I want to look at aggregated data? I would accept your new web interface as addition to console. That would make sense. I now understand that you won't and can't change your approach. Too much time and money is invested in v6. I only hope you will fix your v6 products and document them well, so they work as expected.

What comfort? No fancy app for iPhone?

What about virtual appliance? Is cleanup enabled by default?

Any other news regarding features/fixes?

Isn't there a more elegant way to solve this? I would then have to disable (one by one!) so many default rules. I just want to delete them from rule list.