Jump to content

Monge

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    Brazil
  1. Version 5.3.39.0 Changelog: Fixed: Remote client update task now supports .msi-installers with updated digital signatures and allows seamless client upgrade to version 5.0.2260.x and later. Fixed: With any other than blank password for the administrator account, the User Manager will refuse to create new users. Added: Updated copyright statement for all product components. For me it fixed a bug, while creating a remote installer for Endpoint Security 64bits, due to installer bigger than 100MB. Thank ESET for keeping support for ERA 5.
  2. I could invest time and write bad things in v5 that are still there even after all these years. Profile corruption even in latest v5 version...for example. I could invest time and write bad things in v6 but there are people here doing awesome job in reporting bad things and requesting features. However I am single system administrator for 120 workstations and time is luxury. However, since you asked what specific problems are in place, here are some that pop out first: 1. Main problem you have is with documentation. After 6.3 release you have updated documentation and it's better, ho
  3. Hello, I'm trying to set a scheduler to run an external application in a remote network location(Actually is the einstaller.exe). I Could not find any documentation about it. I probably also need to run this as an administrator. Is it possible?
  4. Has anyone got errors like that? Event Viewer: Error Source: ERA_SERVER Event ID: 502. Error: "KernelProcessRequestFull: Some ThreatSense.Net errors (4) occurred"
  5. Same suggestion as bbahes, go for latest ERA V5, you will see were ESET shines.
  6. How many users requests? I didn't ask for this. It's is a great NAC like feature, but ESET should not have turned ERA into a 'duck' on the process. In my case: Everything works with ERA 5 for the 6k+ clients in 16 places. ERA 6 didn't hit 10 success implementations. I know that is your job to calm things down, but really, ESET should admit failure on releasing this before it's time. At least in my country ESET ended not recommending to use ERA 6 until further notice. Which country? It certainly looks as unfinished product. I think they saw competition moving their s
  7. How many users requests? I didn't ask for this. It's is a great NAC like feature, but ESET should not have turned ERA into a 'duck' on the process. In my case: Everything works with ERA 5 for the 6k+ clients in 16 places. ERA 6 didn't hit 10 success implementations. I know that is your job to calm things down, but really, ESET should admit failure on releasing this before it's time. At least in my country ESET ended not recommending to use ERA 6 until further notice.
  8. In my opinion, ERA 6 is not ready to clients. Like Batman: Arkham Knight for PC, sales should suspended until is fixed(and improved).
  9. That sound really nice. But for my company almost nothing worked. From activation to detect agents and so on. ESET lab engineers even tried to make it work without success(remote access).
  10. Like in many other cases, your frustration seems to be stemming from not understanding the new concept of ERA v6. ERA v6 does not support creation of a local mirror. The feature was replaced by Apache HTTP Proxy which caches downloaded installers and update files. You may choose not to install it if you plan to use another http proxy or create a mirror using ESET Endpoint Antivirus, ESET Endpoint Security or another v6 ESET product, such as ESET File Security. Let us know what you'd need to help with specifically. As of ERA v6, it's not possible to create custom packages. Basicall
  11. Please be more specific as to what issues you've run into while deploying ERA v6, what features or information you lack, etc. We listed to our customers and continually improve the product and also create new KB content and videos to cover topics that our users demand. Marcos, this thread sum almost all problems that we had. Some was solved. The interface, the way you handle it in the web is not as functional as in the windows application. The only way to list all the problem is doing a video comparison, maybe for someone who never used ERA before may like version 6. If you compare
  12. I work in a company with more than 6k installed ESET. This a big step back for ERA. In my experience, some interfaces should never go to WEB. It's like comparing checkpoint client to admin the firewall and the web admin interface from fortigate which lacks many features. I used this thread as an exemple to ESET representatives my disapproval on the Era 6. As long as ERA 5 is supported and updated as it's clients, i will remain using ESET solution, but i am starting to look for alternatives.
×
×
  • Create New...