Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About cdgmol

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. This feature (request) is not necessary anymore. Adding the address or domain of the second part (after "namens") to the ESS 'White list' is doing what I wanted. Some additional information. An example of the full sender address information of such emails: <service=milieudefensie.nl@mail3.suw15.mcsv.net>; namens; Ike Teuling <service@milieudefensie.nl> Until recently, I did not try e.g. @milieudefensie.nl in the ESS 'White list' because that domain is already in my Outlook 'Safe Sender List' and that don't work. So, it's nearly sure that Outlook is using the first address for processing the incoming emails. But last week I was searching for emails with that special addresses and noticed that e.g. '@mail3' or 'service=' did not give any result. Then I tried 'milieudefensie.nl' and 'service@' and that search results were OK. That means that for searching through already received emails, the second address is being used by Outlook. And that was the reason that I have added the second address of the special senders to the ESS 'White list'. I'm glad that I have seen now a few times that this special sender emails are placed at the Inbox.
  2. I understand that you receive legitimate emails (probably a kind of newsletters) from email addresses like those you've mentioned and ESET's Antispam evaluates them as spam which is not what you want. ...... Hello Marcos, I thought (or at least was hoping) that my information was detailed enough to understand the situation. #1. Very important is: it is not a problem that is caused by or related to ESS. #2. Emails from unknown senders are directed/saved to the "unwanted" folder (that depends on my Outlook configuration). #3. Adding "once-only" sender addresses to the 'Safe Sender' or 'White' list is useless. #4a. Adding the feature as described in the last paragraph of my first post, could be the solution for considering the new emails of that sender as safe. #4b. Another way of describing this feature is perhaps that during processing of incoming emails, there should be an additional check if an address is not white listed: if the sender address contains "keyword", then it is a safe email. Note. Adding [sPAM] to the email subject line is an ESS setting and I have switched off that option now. That makes the situation regarding the "unwanted" folder just the same as in the old situation.
  3. Please contact Customer care and provide them with examples of the emails that are incorrectly blocked. Maybe their sender has the IP address blacklisted due to sending out spam in the past and it might be safe to unblock it now. Hello Marcos, I have already had e-mail contact with ESET Support about this subject. It took many replies before the "supporter" understood the situation and what I was asking. The correspondence has Ticket ID: 23851, however it is in Dutch. His final response was that this feature is available in 'ESET Mail Security' (however, I could not find something like that in the User Guide), but that there is no planning for implementing this feature in ESS. The emails are NOT incorrectly blocked by ESS, but the addresses are not in the 'Safe addresses' list of Outlook and this annoying situation exist already very long. However, I never asked Microsoft for a solution and I'm hoping that ESET will add this feature to ESS. Some details about my system and email situation. I have used Outlook 2003 with Windows XP for a very long time and changed to Outlook 2010 (under Win7 Pro) only a few months ago. Since a few years I'm using ESS and (v8) was not integrated in the old situation. The old situation is the main reason why I use the Outlook lists (Safe, Blocking, etc.) and (for me) there is still no reason to transfer all that addresses and domains to the ESS lists. Outlook is configured the usual way: emails from Safe Senders are directed to the Inbox i.s.o. to the "unwanted" folder. Then I have to 'manually' evaluate that emails and move them to the Inbox or to a temporary spam archive (folder). Note. Till now I have always correctly recognised unwanted and dangerous emails (with my own eyes and brains). Note. It is difficult (at least for me) to check how many computer users are familiar with this problem and has also accepted these annoyance (of Outlook?). An important reason for accepting, is that I don't know what keyword(s) are relevant for this problem and that makes it very hard to search for a solution or for (forum) discussions about this issue. During installing and configuring Outlook 2010 (at Win7 Pro with ESS v9) this issue was (re)activated and then I got the idea how it could be solved. And after the unsuccessful discussion with the ESET Support engineer, I decided to post my suggestion at this topic.
  4. I would like to have a "keyword" option for the white (and black) list of ESS. I have a few e-mail subscriptions where the sender address is different every time. That means that adding such an address or domain to the white list is useless. And unfortunately, every new e-mail is marked as SPAM and saved at that location. A few examples: service=milieudefensie.nl@mail3.suw15.mcsv.net service=milieudefensie.nl@mail91.atl71.mcdlv.net service=milieudefensie.nl@mail85.atl71.mcdlv.net service=milieudefensie.nl@mail9.suw15.mcsv.net What should be possible is adding the stable part of such addresses to the white list (of course in a special notation/format). After that, all addresses that contain that "keyword", should be considered as safe.
  5. Sometimes there seem to be duplicate rules and in that case I want to compare them. That has become rather difficult and annoying in v9, because you have to look at the full information in the column Applications. My suggestion is that a Details screen should be added and apart from OK or Abort, a Next and Previous button would be very nice. Note. The Edit screen don't show the application information, but perhaps could Edit and Details be combined.
  6. Triggered by the post of SCR (Posted 17 October 2015 - 08:24 PM), I tried (successfully) the following procedure: #1. Export settings. #2. With Notepad++ (or other editor), replace in that XML file the unwanted strings (including a trailing space) by "empty". #3. After saving, import that modified settings file. So, if there are many rules to edit, it is faster and easier than editing each rule manually. Note. The predefined rules have still long 'names', but normally you don't see them. But I think, there is no need to shrink that descriptions. Besides, there is no default (and needless) beginning of the 'Name' too.
  7. So, having the rules set without 'allow communication for' and 'deny communication for' in future releases would be the first fix, plus having ESET's programs remember the column width would be the second fix. Both would be beneficial to have. I fully agree with that and much less (or not) with most other suggestions. Besides, the view at the FW Rules was OK in version 8 (and 7).
  8. If you go into the Scheduler in the GUI (Tools -> More tools -> Scheduler) straight after the install is finished and uncheck the checkbox for the "First scan" which is scheduled to run 20min after install, then it will not start automatically, and you can instead run a scan later on whenever you like. Thanks for your response SweX, but that don't change my "complaint" about this. And (of course) I know how to prevent things like this. But (re-)installing is a once in a year (or longer) operation and I (and other users) don't think about that pre-scheduled scan. So ESET developers, please no automatic start, but only a remembering message about scanning.
  9. Thanks SCR for your link to this already reported issue. I overlooked this topic because I've only looked in the regular 'ESET Smart Security' section and not in Beta Products sections. And then "easy searching" for 'firewall' don't show that topic.
  10. I find that the screen with the Firewall Rules of v9 is a big degradation compared to the much more clearly and orderly screen of v8 (and v7). What should be done (at least) to improve the situation is: #1. In the left 'Name' column, the 'trailer' (Communication etc.) has to be removed. That will make the name of the process/program readable (again) without changing the column width a lot. Skipping that 'trailer' is acceptable because that info is already available in the Action column. #2. The screen size and all the column widths should be saved, so that next time the layout is the same as set previously. - - - - - Another remark, not specific v9, is the automatically started scan after installation. I have seen the same remark a few days ago, but could not find (easily) that topic again. I don't like that a scan is already started just after installation (and without notification). I prefer very much that I first configure (most of) the settings and then start a scan manually. Note. My OS is Win7 Pro x64 (NL
  • Create New...