MrZork

When I attempted to upgrade a licensed 16.x installation to 17.x, there was a notification that the program wasn't linked to ESET HOME. Stupidly, I followed the directions to link it, and it informed my that ESET could now be "remotely managed." I don't want my PC to be remotely managed. How can I disable this? When I log into the ESET account and look for what a hacker might have available to disable ESET (or whatever), the only thing I see is an option to disconnect the license from the product, which it informs me would disable ESET. Is this all it means by "remote management"? That your license can be disabled? I assume that in this case, ESET would just stop receiving updates, but wouldn't actually shut down? Is that correct? Is there some setting in ESET I can configure to disable remote management?

OK, this is getting very frustrating. Everyone is back from vacation and on normal hours, right? Can I please get an answer to my question? As I said, I'm stuck and not able to activate profiles with 17.x.

What about my question about manually enabling a specific profile with an "always true" activator? Where are the docs on "activators"? How would I create an "always true" activator?

You tested and showed something I explicitly said worked: What I explained didn't work, was adding a column to the grid for "profile": And you ignored the initial question about why profiles were changed to have a completely different meaning, and my general question about how to write an "always true" activator for a profile and where the syntax for activators is documented. These don't require "replication."

Marcos, I see that you've replied to posts made after mine. Why haven't you responded to the questions in this thead? This issue is blocking me from installing the new release.

I upgraded from 16.1.14.0 to 17.0.16 and I'm having problems using the profiles that were working before. For me my profiles are named "GTA V", "Visual Studio Update", "WIndows Update", and similar - they represent certain tasks I want to perform. For example, update Visual Studio, or play GTA V. They don't take effect based on network traffic types - indeed I want ALL traffic subjected to the active profile after I select it. But it looks like you can't select a profile any more. In 17.x, profiles seem to be automatic rules that are activated based on the type of packets, origin network, etc. This is not at all how I was using profiles and makes them useless to me. I really wish the 16.1.x behavior would be brought back, at least as an optional mode. So this brings me to the first question. Profiles now seem to have "activators" that switch them on. My profiles like "GTA V" have no activators so they are not used at all. Is there an "always true" activator that I can manually add to a profile to make it always apply? For example, "Network: any," something like that? Is there a place where the legal syntax for "activators" is described? Secondly, there's a very obvious bug in 17.0.16 with the product that scares me because it would seem to say that you're not even doing basic testing on your released products. If I go to the firewall rules, I can click on a rule and on the right a little details pane will show the profile for the rule (created in 16.1.x). But, if I edit the displayed column set to add "Profile" to the displayed columns, profile is wrongly shown as Any for every record, even records that show the correct, non-Any profile in the right details pane. Is this already filed as a bug, and if not, how would I file it as a bug?

What is ESET Internet Security called now? I see three new products - Essential, Premium, and Ultimate. I need the Firewall and HIPS modules. I don't care about the other features.

I'm not sure what you mean by "communication problems." I'm using interactive mode, not policy mode. This is fact, 100%. Are you saying the the "pre-release" update will solve the first issue where I'm getting popups for IP 127.0.0.1 now where things were working fine before? If that update won't fix this issue, what's the ETA for an update that will? For the port and IP being removed from the advanced interactive rule creation, what's the ETA for a release that will add that feature back? This feature, as I mentioned, played a role in me selecting ESET over its competition when I paid for a license. If it's not restored, I will not be renewing my licenses. Actually, I feel that I was taken already, as with the paid license I expected to receive updates, and this update is not usable. For the last issue with profiles, can you concisely describe what the change was intended to achieve? It's confusing to me, as I had several custom profiles, and then there was the (a single) default. Now, in addition to my custom profiles, there seem to be choices for "public" or "private" profiles. The profile is not shown and not available to be shown as a column in the firewall rules, making them harder to manage - I have to click into each rule to check its associated profiles. I've already reverted to 16.1.14.0 and will stay at that version until these issues have been resolved, as especially the second issue (missing port/IP during rule creation) makes the product unusable for me. You should consider making a mass refund available to your customers if you do not intend to revert this.

I tried updating ESET to v16.2, fortunately only after backing up my system. The system was unusable afterwards. I see mention of some of my issues already on this forum, but I thought I'd list them all together here to see if I can get a response about whether all of these issues will be fixed. BTW, I use interactive mode, with various existing rules. When launching Firefox, for which I had an existing custom rule to allow http(s) access, after the update I started getting prompted that Firefox is trying to access "remote computer" 127.0.0.1 (the local computer). Did some policy change regarding access the local computer? I really don't want to have to modify all my rules for this. When I click "advanced" while manually adding a permanent rule, it no longer shows the port and IP address. and they're no longer added to the rule. This is a huge problem. I reviewed ESET before buying a license and this is part of the behavior I need. Are you offering refunds? I saw mention that this is "as intended," but I can't imagine why you would want to dumb down rule creation. Your customers, especially those creating their own rules in interactive mode, aren't children. The usage of firewall profiles has been modified to be much more difficult, IMO. I had several custom profiles before. Changing the profile is more difficult now, and I'm not even sure whether it has the same behavior. Before, there was just a "default" profile in addition to the ones I created, but now there are various "public" and "private" network options. Also, the profile is no longer shown in the list of firewall rules as a column, which makes managing the rules much more difficult. I have to click into each rule to check the profile it's associated with. I updated because I hoped it would have a useful improvement, like my suggestion (in the future improvements thread) of organizing all the rules on a per app basis, so that each app's rules can be edited separately (where rules are associated with an app). Instead, get a ton of bugs. Do you have a QA process? How did this release pass testing? Seems like anyone using interactive mode would have immediately hit multiple issues.

But I don't want to disable that status in the ESET dashboard, I only want to disable it being sent as a notification to the desktop after a reboot, and I don't want to disable all notifications, just that one.

But I've already disabled updates and LiveGrid, so that (and your admonition to always update) can't be the reason for the server contact. So why does it need to contact servers with those disabled? Even with the updates disabled, I see logs every 10 minutes saying "UpdPerformPicoUpdate". What needs checking every 10 minutes, and what data is being sent to the servers? Also, you didn't respond to my other question about how to stop the notification that "My system may be at risk" that appears after every boot.

I have an activated installation of ESET Internet Security on which I've disabled scheduled updates, so the product currently does not update itself. However, if I unplug the network cable, it will eventually show a notification that it not able to contact ESET servers. Why is it trying to contact ESET servers if I've disabled scheduled updates, and how do I configure it not try to contact the servers? What information is being sent back to the servers? Also, the ESET GUI dashboard shows a warning that "My system may be at risk" presumably from having the scheduled updates turned off, which is fine, but this text is also shown as a notification whenever the system is rebooted. How do I disable this specific notification without also disabling the warning inside the ESET GUI?

Description: Move all app-specific firewall and HIPs rules into separate per-app rule editor page. Detail: Many other firewalls collect together all rules associated with a particular app, for example Firefox.exe on Windows. So when you want to add, modify, or remove Firewall, HIPS, or other rules related to a particular app, you pick out the app in a list (not the rule), click on that to open a window specific to that app, and then edit the rules specific to that app. This would be much more efficient and less painful than having every firewall rule on the system dumped into a giant list that's a mile long. This existing list would still exist for rules without an app, but would not be used for any rule with an associated app. An example of this approach was the Agnitum Outpost Firewall which disappeared a few years ago. (It also had HIPS features.) I've included a screenshot.

OK, thanks. If you can find out whether the European stores accept US credit cards, please follow up here with that info. Otherwise, I guess I'll just have to try it. (Sheesh. The website logged me out even though I posted a message 8 minutes ago.)

I was asking about trial country vs. purchase country, not purchase country vs. activation country. If I started the free trial in one country, am I stuck with that country, or can I replace that trial license with a paid license from any other country? As long as the payment is accepted, I can't see how there would be any other problem. I have a VPN so I can take on the IP address of any country.

Also, does it matter where my trial license is from vs. where I buy the paid license? Will the software let me enter a valid license from any country or would it have to be bought from the same country where the trial was started?

Do the European ESET "store" websites accept US credit cards? Most of the currency would be Euros, but I think the credit cards will automatically convert it for you, with an added charge.

What is "ESET LLC"? Are you referring to a specific website? If there is no international version, why is there an international website? https://www.eset.com/int/download-home/

If I go to the international website, then when I click "buy" it dumps me into the "store" website associated with the country my IP address is in (which I can change with a VPN). But, I want to buy the international version, not the US version, or some other country-specific version. How do I do that? With a French IP, it will take me to the French ESET store. If I am able to read or translate the text, would I be able to buy the French version of ESET with a US credit card? My trial license was issued in Europe (for what I thought was the international version) via my VPN.

ESET Internet Security, home edition (international). Need Firewall + HIPS.

Yes, I'm aware of the how the rules are applied in order, but it would still be useful to be able to sort a column, such as the application, so that all rules for that application are sorted together. In this case, the original order could be applied as a secondary sort (so when the value in the sorted column is the same for more than one record). Thie would allow the rules to be grouped by various properties. As a safety mechanism, a red bubble could appear when the rules are sorted like that explaining that they have been sorted and so the execution ordering is different than the drawn ordering. OK, I will make a post to that other thread.

I was trying to avoid US downloads, so I wouldn't want to activate a US license. The problematic part of your explanation for me was the discussion of load balancing and tracert as it related to download.eset.com because I can never get it to resolve to any other IP address, no matter the origin IP.

I checked the logs for network protection and they're always empty. The docs I've seen seem to suggest this is only for logs of network attacks? I want to see the logs of, let's say, vlc.exe getting blocked by my firewall rule.

OK, coming from Output Firewall, I'd finding the firewall rules editor difficult to use: Is there a way to sort the rules by a particular column or to reorder columns? Is there a task-centric view for the rules, so the rules for a particular process are gathered together and presented together, separately from the rules for other tasks? For rules with no associated process, it makes since to just put them in a global list, but for ones associated with a process, showing the rules process-by-process rather than just dumped all together in a long list would make working with the rules much easier. I thought I'd ask about these before submitting feedback because I'm a new user and perhaps I've missed some way of accomplishing what I'm asking.

Not sure I follow. I wasn't actually in France. I used my VPN to connect to a server in France so I'd have a French IP address, and then I tried to download the international (and also the French) version of ESET. I can pick a server in many different countries and my IP will then appear as from that country. In every case, it still trace routes download.eset.com to the IP 38.90.226.110 in the US. Does the site use DNS load balancing or HTTP load balancing? The latter is harder to detect and all traffic will originate from the same IP. The issue in that case is that then all traffic is flowing through that US website, for all downloads. Can you provide a sample trace route that doesn't hit that same IP? There are free VPNs you can use to connect from several different countries.