Jump to content

itman

Most Valued Members
  • Content Count

    6,181
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    173

Kudos

  1. Upvote
    itman received kudos from fabioquadros_ in This guys test a few days ago with Eset   
    Another "absurd" test from the PC Security Channel.
    To begin, the author is an Emsisoft employee that "supposedly" runs this web site independently. If you believe that, I assume you also still believe in the tooth fairy.
    The reason why he disabled real-time scanning is his supposed objective is to test Eset's behavior detection. He repeatedly refers to Eset's HIPS indicating the fool has no idea how Eset's protection mechanisms work. By disabling real-time protection, he disabled the most important new Eset protection; Augur's advanced machine learning.
    This type of "garbage" testing is what you would expect from the amateur ad hoc malware test sites. These also espouse disabling a security solution's real-time protection to supposedly test a products behavior detection capability. However, the PC Security Channel author purports that he is a skilled "security professional."
    Finally and most import and highlighted previously by @Marcos is this. Malware doesn't just "magically" arrive on your PC. All this like crap testing assumes just that since the amateurs just run their previously downloaded password protected archived samples one after another. The whole objective of modern security software is to prevent those downloads from happening. If this can be achieved, anything after that point is irrelevant.
  2. Upvote
    itman received kudos from peteyt in Latest update BSOD.   
    FYI in regards to anyone using Win 10 Insider builds:
    https://www.onmsft.com/news/kaspersky-declines-support-windows-insider-builds-windows-10
    To the above, I add that just because Eset runs w/o issue on a Win 10 Insider build does not imply it is working properly. In other words, it is "user beware" in this regard.
  3. Upvote
  4. Upvote
  5. Upvote
    itman received kudos from TheDeeGee in Problems excluding files from detection.   
    I personally believe that a global exclusion for AutoIt is a bad idea since it is bundled with a lot of installers. But "each to their own" on this subject.
  6. Upvote
    itman received kudos from Azure Phoenix in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Microsoft added Tamper Protection in Win 10 1903. Oddly, it has to be manually enabled.
    I keep looking for a published bypass if it, but so far so good for Microsoft. It also appears to "have held its own" against the latest and greatest version of Trickbot which tried its darnedest to disable it:
    https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/new-trickbot-version-focuses-on-microsofts-windows-defender/
    Such can not be said for MalwareBytes or Sophos.
  7. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Add option to realtime scanner to block obfuscated Powershell scripts. Option would be dependent upon Win 10 AMSI option enabled in the Eset GUI.
    Justification
    Microsoft added a like mitigation in the form of a Windows Defender Exploit Guard ASR mitigation effective with Win 10 1709. ASR mitigations are only effective if Windows Defender is enabled as the realtime scan engine.
    Further justification is Eset's failure to detect malware in highly obfuscated PowerShell script in a Malware Research Group ad hoc test: https://www.mrg-effitas.com/research/current-state-of-malicious-powershell-script-blocking/
  8. Upvote
    itman received kudos from Azure Phoenix in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Add option to realtime scanner to block obfuscated Powershell scripts. Option would be dependent upon Win 10 AMSI option enabled in the Eset GUI.
    Justification
    Microsoft added a like mitigation in the form of a Windows Defender Exploit Guard ASR mitigation effective with Win 10 1709. ASR mitigations are only effective if Windows Defender is enabled as the realtime scan engine.
    Further justification is Eset's failure to detect malware in highly obfuscated PowerShell script in a Malware Research Group ad hoc test: https://www.mrg-effitas.com/research/current-state-of-malicious-powershell-script-blocking/
  9. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Add a column showing PID number in the following logs after the noted existing log column headings:
    1. HIPS - Application
    2. Network - Source
    This is necessary to properly identify the origin for multiple same process occurrences such as svchost.exe. 
  10. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    It actually used to do this prior to ver. 11. I believe this has something to do with Microsoft's decree to AV vendors that they can't interfere with the boot process in Win 10 ver. 1709. I am actually surprised that Eset even processes an Ask HIPS use in ver. 11 and instead, just auto allows it. I know it is doing so because it will slightly delay your boot time; something I though wasn't supposed to happen on Win 10 ver. 1709.
    Again it is a bit peculiar that the HIPS default action is allow. However, it always has been this way. To be honest, I seriously doubt Eset will change it to block mode.
    A proper frame of reference for you is Eset first and foremost created the HIPS for its own internal use. As such, it really isn't designed to be user configurable other than to create a few exception rules. This is more so evident in the retail vers. of Eset. For example, Eset added file wildcard capability a while back for the Endpoint vers. but refuses to do so for the retail vers..
  11. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    I explained this once to you. Eset has internal default rules and those rules take precedence to any user created rules.
    Also if an alert response is not received within a short period of time, Eset will auto allow the action. This comes into play for example with any ask rule that might be triggered during the boot process. Those will be allowed by the time the PC initializes, the desktop appears, and finally the Eset GUI is started. 
  12. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Nvidia in their "infinite security wisdom" created two .bat scripts they dumped in C:\Windows directory. Their startup service can run these .bat scripts if errors are encountered in their software as recovery procedures. So basically, you have to allow svchost.exe to run cmd.exe. Not the most secure thing to do if malware creates a malicious service. Hence my recommendation that file wildcard support is needed.
    There is also the issue of why the HIPS hasn't been updated to reflect Win 10's current ability to uniquely identify an individual svchost.exe service by process id. 
  13. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    Yeah, I know about this.
    Just be careful with GitHub software. Being open source, it can be hacked. One of the major sources of nasty backdoors has been GitHub software.
  14. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    As far as anti-exec processing, there is a one built into Win 10 - native SmartScreen. I have tested with a couple of unknown reputation files and each time got an alert from it when they tried to run. Eset let the files run w/o issue. Neither file was malicious but I prefer an option to disallow execution in this instance.
    The downside is native SmartScreen relies on "The Mark of the Web" remaining associated with the downloaded file. There are ways to "strip that off" of a download.
  15. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    I did some of my own testing in regards to this business about the HIPS not detecting Farber activity. For starters, I set the HIPS to Interactive mode and then ran Farbar.
    To begin with, Farbar will load and begin execution because you started it manually. However, the first attempt by Farbar to perform any activity the HIPS monitors for will cause an alert as shown by the below screen shot.
    Now if you create a .bat script and run Farbar by execution of the script, you will receive a HIPS alert about the startup of Farbar. Likewise, malware doesn't magically run by itself. Something has to execute it. 

  16. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    I have run Farbar in the past and Eset HIPS in Auto or Safe mode will not alert because its a safe app.
    Are you saying that the HIPS in Interactive or Policy mode is not throwing an alert at Farber startup time?
  17. Upvote
    itman received kudos from persian-boy in Future changes to ESET Internet Security and ESET Smart Security Premium   
    You will need to show an example of an .exe that Eset HIPS did not detect running in Interactive mode. The only way I know that could occur is if you inadvertently created an allow rule while running in Training mode or by manual creation. 
    One possibility for example is that an allow rule was created for a process to start another process. If the allow rule did not specifically state what process start up was allowed, then Eset will allow any child process startup from the parent process.
×
×
  • Create New...