Jump to content

peteyt

Most Valued Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,147

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    41

 Content Type 

Posts posted by peteyt

    sorting the Firewall rules list by name, date, etc.

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    Just to add I have just googled and looked at how other security vendors are doing this. I will not post the images as I'm not sure if this would be against forum rules as it could be seen as advertising competition. Most have maybe made the firewall rules too simple but they have made the design work a lot better. The names are much easier to read because of the text I mentioned above and some contain icons and the ability to rearrange. I also discovered duplicate rules when looking in esets rules which makes having a better way to view and organise them even more handy

    sorting the Firewall rules list by name, date, etc.

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    On 17/02/2016 at 4:50 PM, Marcos said:

    As of v9, rules are evaluated in the order they appear in the list which was not the case in previous versions of ESS. Also you can click the magnifier glass icon and enter a string you'd like to use as a filter which is new in v9.

    I understand it is arranged this way but why no option to arrange it other ways? Most firewalls tend to allow you to organise my name and other things. I think this would make things far easier and it seems backwards to me that it is removed. Yes there is the search options if you want to find specific rules but this doesn't help if your basically just going through the rules in general.  Also the fact allow communication is added at the start of each application doesn't help as it makes it harder to see the application name. Removing that part of the text and then allowing the organisation by name would make things far easier alongside application icons.

    I see someone mentioned dead firewall rules as well. Does eset remove these or do you have to remove them manually? An option to allow this would be beneficial

    Have Any V10 Users Inst'd MBAM 3.0?

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    29 minutes ago, psychopomp1 said:

    Hi,

    IMHO Malwarebytes v3 is the absolute antithesis of ESET Smart Security. Whilst ESET SS is one of (if not the) lightest security products around, MB v3 is a severe memory/system resources hog, is full of bugs galore and feels like you're using a product from the 1980's.

    As an example, my Thinkpad X220 notebook with intel i7 processor, running with Win 7 64 bit and 16gb ram only uses ~ 60mb of system memory for ESET SS yet when i installed the bloatware known as Malwarebytes v3.05 it used ~300mb of system memory, made my notebook fan spin almost constantly and worst of all, was making my notebook battery last less than 5 hours when i got at least 6 hrs with no MB bloatware installed.

    On the plus side, I didn't find any conflicting issues between the 2 softwares but I removed MB  v3.05 almost immediately. The other day i re-installed MB v3.06 of MB and the same performance issues were still there and when i asked the forum mods why they aren't fixed in v3.06 i was told MB has always worked this way!!!

    Needless to say I won't be going back to MB v3 anytime soon even though I was foolish enough to buy a lifetime licence on ebay.... :(

    You can maybe use the lifetime license on previous versions. Looks like they are trying to fix the issues anyways. I didn't think they had any lifetime licenses left.

    Have Any V10 Users Inst'd MBAM 3.0?

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    20 hours ago, COStark26 said:

    Thanks for all of the the Comments.

    I've been following the Really Problematic release of 3.0 and noted the Sticky (currently 1st in 3.0 Forum) that just appeared for a Pre-release Beta Dnload Link that allegedly Corrects Many of the problems I've been reading about.

    Peteyt, IF you chance this Dnload they say they'll auto-update it if they make any changes to the final release . TomFace, I concur with your approach but I won't give up using it until the App proves it just isn't workable. I'm just biding my time, like you, for the most logical "trial" attempt, and the 3.0 Forum users will surely let you know how things are progressing - or not. The ESS users were obviously very relevant to my final decision. SCR, a user of my Macrium Reflect (imaging) has confirmed the Fix for the Ransomware/SVI file data garbage issue, and I'll definitely make the Image. Sorry you trialed it too early as they'll surely get this fixed.

    Thanks again to all!

    I've updated to the Beta however the last few days I didn't notice any issues although the issues with parts of it's protection turning off seemed to happen at random. So far so good though.

    It feels like version 3 came out of Beta too soon as it's been very buggy. However as a lifetime license user I'm happy that they are still honouring the lifetime license and that the lifetime license includes the ransomware and exploit stuff as previously you had to pay for the exploit stuff separately. I thought I was probably going to have to pay extra for it so was quite surprised.

    Sour Grapes?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    The problem is more browsers means more issues. It's already a pain for web developers trying to support multiple browsers -  not as bad as in the past but still an issue. Also there's then those who rely on extensions and other stuff.

    Fails Leak test

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    3 hours ago, itman said:

    Appears to be confusion as to the purpose of the GRC leak test and others like it.

    First, note that you download and subsequently execute the GRC leak test. The purpose of this test is to determine if your firewall can detect the outbound connection.

    By default, the Eset firewall will allow all outbound connections. In this configuration, the firewall will fail every leak test. If that is a concern, then set the firewall to Interactive mode as previously discussed.

    However, you should fully access the impact of using the firewall in Interactive mode. Unless you are an advanced user with technical knowledge of outbound connections required by both the Windows OS and application software, there is a high likelihood that you will block necessary outbound connections required by this software to function properly.

    Additionally if you search the web for discussions on whether outbound firewall monitoring is necessary, you will find conflicting statements on such activity. The best overall statement on the subject is that outbound firewall traffic monitoring only is useful if malware has already installed itself. If this has occurred, the user has other issues than just outbound firewall traffic to be concerned about. Other uses of outbound firewall monitoring are privacy related. For example Windows 10 telemetry activities are a concern to many users. The problem with monitoring outbound telemetry traffic is it is also used for system diagnostics purposes and other legitimate traffic. Again, it requires technical knowledge to differentiate between valid system traffic and "spying" like activities.

    Bottom line - for the average PC user, the Eset firewall best setting is its default allow all outbound Internet traffic. 

    I always thought interactive was best in case you are unsure about some applications.

    I always have my firewall as interactive so if a suspicious program tries to connect to the internet I can block it or if I'm unsure allow it to connect just once. I find it handy if I'm installing something that may come with unwanted extras - if Eset doesn't detect this extra's I can at least stop them from connecting.

    Also I've always wondered if automatic mode can make the wrong choice - e.g. block something good and allow something dangerous or suspicious. At least in interactive mode I know it's down to me which I suppose could confuse those who aren't very computer literate.

    Version 10.0.386.0 appears to have been released

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    A program I use to check if any of my programs are out of date reported Eset was out of date a few days ago. I couldn't seen a mention of this on the site or forums and Eset itself (Internet Security) couldn't find an update. I was able to find on another site the changelog and when I downloaded from the official Eset site, it updated my Internet Security to the latest version. I presume this is being rolled out slowly in stages or something along those lines? For those interested this is the apparent changelog:

    * Adds support for Chrome v53-56 (x32/x64) in Banking & Payment Protection
    * Fixes rare activation bug when user upgrades from previous version and activation ends in endless loop
    * Improves installation on Windows 8, 8.1
    * Updates strings for Updater and Scheduler
    * Fixes several minor bugs

    Support policy for Fast and Slow ring builds of Windows 10

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    We kindly ask you to refrain from personal attacks. Jesse didn't complain about ESET not fixing bugs in IP builds of Windows 10, it was rather other users in other topics who did.

    By installing Insider Preview builds one must understand that Insider Preview builds are not final and as such there's a good chance they contain less or more severe bugs that may manifest with specific 3rd party software like it happened in the case of data corruption in downloaded files. In such case, ESET is not the vendor who should address the issue; it's a task for Microsoft who owns the source code of Windows and can make fixes in their code.

    We welcome and highly appreciate any feedback, even regarding Insider Preview builds. Although we test them internally, we may not always discover possible issues and bugs introduced in newer IP builds. Based on the feedback we can investigate new issues and determine if they occur because of a bug in Windows or because something has substantially changed and we need to adapt to it.

    I hope my post didn't come as a personal attack. I'm all for people using the insider builds, Eset needs to know of any issues so they can fix them. However I am concerned about the amount of people who don't seem to know the risks of insider builds and due to this blame Eset or whatever software they are using.

    Support policy for Fast and Slow ring builds of Windows 10

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    Thanks Ken, I hadn't expected any other answer from you. And there is a truth to yours, but that truth may lead me to switch to another company that does support my workflow. 

     

    Years ago it took more than 5 years to build a new version of Windows. If Microsoft would wait until 2021 to release Windows 11, they'd be out of business. It's an unfortunate truth and it seems that Microsoft is learning fast, but making mistakes. I hope they keep learning from these mistakes and that the number of these mistakes will be less in the future.

     

    I agree that there ae more important problems than most of mine, which is why I spend quite a bit of time to figure things out, test hypotheses and then report feedback. 

     

    I don't believe that companies like Eset should fix the problems microsoft created. I'd still like them to keep my system secure and my files in one piece, or warn me when they can't. Or I'll be unfortunately forced to keep my system secure in another way. And I'd think that unfortunate, because Eset is providing a product I like in every other way and which I promote to others looking for fast and reliable security.

    As I've mentioned on a few posts and even got some people apparently annoyed for repeatedly mentioning it, this is not an Eset problem. 

     

    I could be wrong, but as far as I know, most security programs have limited or no support for windows 10 insider builds, with most sticking to the stable versions. I'm sure I read Build 14965 caused a lot of issues for multiple third party antivirus, and not just eset. You could move to a different security suite that might work on the current insider build only for it to break on the next one.

    Scheduled Scans

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

     

    Description:  A few suggestions to make the Firewall rules list more user-friendly, again. 

     

    Detail:  Up until (and including) version 8 the rules list had the following useful features which are now missing in v.9:

     

    - "Detailed view" was available where the list could be sorted by various categories, most importantly by name and date modified.  Detailed view is gone in v.9 for not apparent reason, and so the list cannot be sorted anymore.  Please either bring back Detailed view with sorting, OR enable sorting in the main rules list.

     

    - Program icons were shown next to each application name.  The icons made the list very easy to browse and made all safe applications easy to identify.  Icons have been removed in v.9.  Please bring back program icons in the list.

     

    -  The application column in v.9 shows the full directory path, and the app name at the very end of it.  This makes the rules list even more difficult to read.  The whole thing is just a big blob of text, very tedious to go through.  I have to extend the app name column, scroll to the end of the line and find the actual app name at the end of the path.  In version 8 only the app name was shown, and the full path was displayed as a tooltip when scrolling over the app name.  That was much more user-friendly.  Please either use a tooltip for the path, or create a separate column for the path. 

     

    - The column width is reset every time I enter the rules list.  I have to extend the application name column every time in order to read the name.  This is especially hard with the long path name shown in that column.  Up until v.8 ESET remembered the column widths and it did not reset them every time the list was opened.  Please let ESET save the column width settings.

     

    The list in version 8 worked well and it didn't need 'fixing' since it wasn't broken.  I understand the need to modernize the GUI once in a while, but that really doesn't mean just gutting a bunch of useful features and replacing them with a 'search' button (the magnifier glass icon in the top right corner), which is not a replacement for all the things I mentioned above.  The search is useful, but most of the time I do not need to search for a specific application.  Instead, I regularly go through the entire list to remove any outdated entries and look for anything that may seem suspicious, or revise the list for whatever reason.  That's very difficult to do in version 9. 

     

    I'm not asking for any new features, all I'm asking is bring back the user-friendly list style from previous versions, or give us an alternative, instead of just gutting the user-friendly sortable list. 

     

    Thank you for your consideration.

     

     

    EDIT:

     

    - Another feature that's been removed, that was present in the Detailed View in v.8, was the green / red arrow-icon identifier for 'allowed' and 'denied' inbound or outbound traffic.  This allowed me to very easily identify all blocked and non-blocked programs in the list.  All this color-coding was very convenient.  I don't understand why it has been removed. 

     

    For comparison:

     

    v.8  hxxp://s5.postimg.org/akn0j22yf/ESET_rules_list_v8.png

     

    v.9  hxxp://s5.postimg.org/45nzmdw8n/ESET_rules_list_v9.png

     

    Well, it turns out the v10 firewall rules list looks just as bleak and difficult to navigate as v9, and it's hard on the eyes, so I am re-posting my suggestion for a user-friendly list that was present in v8 and earlier.

     

    I would love this to. Being able to organise by name would make perfect sense and I don't really know why you can't do this anymore. It doesn't help having this added to the start of each application "Allow communication for ..."   e.g. "Allow communication for Chrome" and so on. Most firewalls simply have the application name. Adding this text just makes it much harder to look at.

     

    The firewall rules and the fact some windows cannot be resized - especially annoying in the antivirus result window, are two things I really find backwards for what otherwise is an amazing security program

    ESET causing failed requests on Windows 10 Insider Preview

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    I’m using a Windows 10 Insider build, which has been updated to 14965 last week. Since then, when browsing the web in Chrome, some HTTP requests fail with the ERR_INVALID_CHUNKED_ENCODING error (see attached screenshot). This makes web browsing unusable, because style sheets, scripts and images fail to load.

    When this issue first appeared last week, I reverted to an earlier Windows 10 build (Microsoft lets Insiders do that, but only for a week), and now I’m again on the latest build and the issue has re-appeared. I have tried re-installing ESET Smart Security, but that did not resolve the issue.

    Note that ESET attempted to insert a root certificate into my root store, but I refused to allow that and turned off SSL protection (“Enable HTTP checking” control).

    Right now, my options are to either revert to a previous build again (for another week) or stop using ESET and switch to a different AV software.

    Please help!

    As people have said this is a Microsoft problem and it's something that will likely keep reoccurring in some form or another for any security suite used on the insider version.

    Sadly it's either use an insider version with possible risks or go to stable as far as I can tell

    ESET Smart Security vs DDoS Attack ?

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

     

     

     

    Did we not have a previous long discussion about this here: https://forum.eset.com/topic/7698-info-about-eset-smart-security/?p=41296

     

    the topic you show me is old this is new topic stop show me old topic the problem is the ativirus with firewall have 0 protection for your network when some idiot,kid,noob,hacker etc sorry for language try to shut down your network this thing annoys me

     

    more and more company create weak firewall same with firewall windows come on this is no protection is 0 protection you must understand why you create same weak firewall when flood become nr 1 pff the antivirus It has job to stop virus but the firewall it have the job to stop hacker,dos or ddos attack or other types of attacks a firewall would have to work like this to have good protection for your network

     

    no like this firewall stop virus,spyware or malware etc this you can find on the internet for free why the firewall to have this protection is 0 for your pc soon years 2017 and company create weak firewall same with windows firewall this means 0 protection for your network pathetic

     

    As the earlier posts state, ddos attacks are not something home users will experience as it is something generally targeted at websites, servers etc. If you want DDOS protection for a server you will need a product that is designed for this, rather than a product that is aimed at home users. There are plenty of DDOS solutions out there, but they probably won't be cheap and even using them, you can never guarantee 100 percent safety

     

     

    dude just because i open a free server my home or i play game online does not mean the hacker dont attacked you come on

     

    yes i know you can buy dedicate server but it costs a lot and I do not have so much money for strong security

     

    You are not reading what I am saying. You are complaining about an Eset home product that is designed just for that, a home user. It is not designed for servers as servers are generally something used more by professionals than an average home user. You can keep complaining but it won't change the fact you will need something that is tailored to DDOS attacks.

     

    If you don't believe me read this hxxp://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/archive/hosting-discussion/2546841-help-with-ddos-on-home-run-serveror simply google preventing ddos for home users. Basically without paying for a good server which offers protection there's nothing else you can do. If you are hosting the server yourself, it is very easy for someone to overload it. Reliable hosters have a lot of things in place to help and even they struggle.

    epson w-4630 with document capture pro

    in ESET Internet Security & ESET Smart Security Premium

    Posted

    got eset to work with scanner with personal firewall off, a custom setup in hips.

    Interesting when personal firewall is paused (off) it still would not work.

    It has to be turned off not paused.

    Frustrating experience is the interactive user mode, it does not work all the time.

    Further more detailed info about error messages oder logs are missing.

     

    Some of the settings had to be made in admin mode, cumbersome too.

    Eset has me served well in the past but issues like this are very frusttrating and one

    really wonders if a change to annother product would be justified.

     

    The help in the forum from other Eset users is great, it is a perfect tool

    to brainstorm in getting a problem solved.

     

    Will dig into the personal firewall settings in the next days and see what I can come up with.

    Glad you've found at least a temporary fix. I'm not sure if anyone mentioned but did you ever look in the troubleshooting wizard? I always have my firewall in interactive mode and basically tell Eset to remember to allow all my main stuff. However I've had stuff that's blocked automatically in the past without a allow/deny window appearing. Luckily in most cases now the troubleshooting wizard tells me what's blocked and allows me to sort it. Often I've allowed the main .exe of something to be allowed but it's actually blocked another needed file without notifying me.

×
×
  • Create New...