Jump to content

peteyt

Most Valued Members
  • Posts

    2,147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    41

Posts posted by peteyt

  1. 9 hours ago, CaucasianOvcharka said:

    Thanks for your answer itman. Yes, I have been changing passwords manually. There are more than 100 websites on which I have used the same combination , so it's a bit boring of course...This time I am giving unique passwords to each of the websites on which I am changing the passwords and writing them in a text file on my pc, so even if one of my passwords got stolen by a website's data breach in the future, I will not need to change my password on all those websites.

    Yeah this is the best idea and using a password manager can also help with this. If you have the premium version, eset includes one.

    Another option is to have hard to guess passwords for important stuff at least and enable 2fa where possible. I know people who also use a certain email address for sites they don't want to link to their main email. This can also be good for spam

  2. 11 minutes ago, New_Style_xd said:

    The way I see it, and put to let updating manually, as I do here on mine. remembering that if you choose to leave it manually you have to always update during the day of use. 😁

    Problem is you'd have to check a few times each day to make sure you had the latest updates as they are released a few times daily usually. 

    When it comes to security I'd rather have it on automatic myself so I know it's up to date 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  3. 1 hour ago, CaucasianOvcharka said:

    Well, actually I think I found the data breach which exposed my account name and password.It's an online gaming website which had the data breach in 2019, I was a member of them.

    Still I don't understand why Chrome didn't warn me about my exposed account name and password combination much earlier...

    It's worth signing up to https://haveibeenpwned.com which alerts you for breaches. If you sign up it will show you all the websites that your email address has been breached on

  4. On 9/30/2022 at 6:57 AM, Ira Kalmus said:

    This is disappointing, but not unexpected.  The problem is that I despise Windows 10 and can only barely tolerate Windows 7.

    As ESET 9 was probably the only AV that could allow me to use the OS that I preferred, I gladly renewed without "shopping" for alternatives.  Now ... nothing to stop me from looking for another vendor.  Too bad after 15 years using this product.

    By the way, I'm on my XP box using RDP to access a Win7 "drone" to use Firefox.  I have needed this for some time to access some websites, such as my bank, that cut off XP with claims of "safety Issues."  Seriously, they wouldn't know a safety issue if one smacked them in the head.  I have not had a single issue with XP that ESET NOD32 has not dealt with cleanly in 15 years.  In the last 10, I can't recall seeing a detection that wasn't me playing with something that MS doesn't like, so the AV community tries to kill it.

    So please don't tell me my XP is not "safe."  It is as safe as the user makes it.  I know, I know ... the vast majority of users do not have my knowledge and experience and need corporations to look out for them.  But when self-serving behemoths like MS do that, they sure seem to be looking to enhance their own revenue.  I would have paid for a more compact and efficient version of XP with a consistent user interface that isn't trying to look like Apple.

    I think letting the technically capable think for themselves would not be a bad thing.  But what do I know?  I've only been "doing" computer stuff since 1972.

    It was good run.  Thank you ESET for hanging on this long.  Maybe I'll stick with you.  Depends on how much you raise your prices in our greed driven economy.

    I understand your point but for me personally there's always a risk when using a non supported OS. It's not patched anymore and so when something does get found it puts everyone who uses it at risk.

    An AV might be able to potentially help but I've always felt it's a prison with a hole in the fence. You can have security that is good but nothing changes the fact there's a gapping hole in the fence.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  5. 37 minutes ago, TomasP said:

    Hi, I was able to reproduce this, thanks for reporting.

    I will raise this issue with the forum developers.

    Thanks for the reply. Noticed it for a month or so. Presume an update caused the issue 

  6. 2 hours ago, Kristal said:

    Yes, I do. But I don't use it in general, I just use it only 1 month to decide to buy it or not. Is it a crime? Okay, you can report to FBI about my crime.

    The reason I mentioned it is you've been posting on here for longer than a month and have mentioned a lot about testing malware samples.

    I wondered if the reason support was limited was because you where not a paying customer - eset do give support but that is limited for non paying customers.

     

     

     

     

  7. 2 minutes ago, Kristal said:

    I have a technical issue with ESET product, so I asked Ukrainian ESET support to help me resolve it. I have created new tickets again and again, but they close them all without any response about my technical issue. They just say something like "Don't write to us again! We will not help you!". I can provide names of their all and screenshots or files of their emails(on demand). I created tickets with these numbers: CS-27966, CS-28009, CS-28011.

    Can I just ask, you mentioned a trial in a previous post. Are you using a trial version of eset

  8. 1 hour ago, New_Style_xd said:

    I was looking at Kaspersky's partnership with INTEL, with protections and Hadware solutions and customers who use KASPERSKY don't need to have 9th to 10th generation machines.

    https://www.kaspersky.com/partners

     

    I could be wrong but I presume that is a different kind of partnership - it says they work with Intel and AMD etc. What Eset is doing is basically integrating its products to work with new features on intel chips but those features will not work on older systems without those chips/

  9. 10 hours ago, New_Style_xd said:

    😭 I am completely disappointed by this news. Look, I have a machine. but it's not a 10th Gen processor. I'm thinking this has turned into a White Elephant. unfortunately the vast majority of users will not use all thetechnology and protection it would provide. unfortunately, ESET you got this point wrong. 😥

     ignore that it said it hadn't posted so I hit send and submitted it twice 

     

     

  10. 10 hours ago, New_Style_xd said:

    😭 I am completely disappointed by this news. Look, I have a machine. but it's not a 10th Gen processor. I'm thinking this has turned into a White Elephant. unfortunately the vast majority of users will not use all the technology and protection it would provide. unfortunately, ESET you got this point wrong. 😥

    If this is something hardware based then if you have hardware that doesn't support it it isn't going to work.

    Eset isn't going to stop developing general features. Think of this as just a little added extra. 

  11. 2 hours ago, itman said:

    So it took Eset almost 3 weeks to determine these drivers were malicious ..........🙄

    BTW - these driver samples should be reported to Microsoft which still doesn't detect them so that their code signing certificates are revoked.

    I'd be curious to hear from Eset why it took 3 weeks.

    I understand they will need to do some testing but presume some is automated. I presume they also get a lot of submissions. But the issue I have is that in between those 3 weeks many people may have been infected which will be alarming to those people if they heard it was submitted a while ago and yet has only just been added as a signature

  12. 3 hours ago, Kristal said:

    No. I tested both products with 8k+ modern malwares, ESET detects malwares better than MBAM, BUT there are a lot of malwares which were detected by MBAM and were compromised by ESET, so there is a reason to use them both.

    The thing is you can use them together but there is always a potential risk. 

    Think of it this way - 2 security products realtime protection both detect something but as they do at the same time it causes issues as both try to block the same file. You could argue that the result could actually be that neither block it because of this and the virus gets through.

    Most people would as mentioned above only have 1 realtime AV. You can try both but there's always a risk but it depends if your willing to take that risk. If not just use the free version and run on demand scans 

     

×
×
  • Create New...