Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
Of LoLBins, 0-Days, ESET, and Microsoft Defender
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Andy Ful" data-source="post: 1083504" data-attributes="member: 32260"><p>To sum up.</p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">This video does not show that Eset is worse than Defender.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">No video test can show that Eset is worse than Defender and vice versa.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">This video is not a real-world protection test.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The video tests can be misunderstood by many people who think that a failure on the example can prove some minority of the overall protection.</li> </ol><p>The above was mentioned in my posts and those posted by [USER=109138]Practical Response[/USER].</p><p></p><p>If we assume that points 1-5 are true, we can focus on what information can follow from the video.</p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Defender protection can be slightly stronger when blocking the attack method via Certutil.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Blocking that method is probably uncommon among AVs on default settings (more examples needed).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">It is unclear if Eset could improve its protection by blocking that method on default settings (the method can be only a part of a real-world attack).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">That method is not malicious, so the decision to block it can be considered by the AV vendor if the attack can bypass other protection features.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">That method can be potentially dangerous when the payload is undetected by the AV.</li> </ol></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Andy Ful, post: 1083504, member: 32260"] To sum up. [LIST=1] [*]This video does not show that Eset is worse than Defender. [*]No video test can show that Eset is worse than Defender and vice versa. [*]This video is not a real-world protection test. [*]The video tests can be misunderstood by many people who think that a failure on the example can prove some minority of the overall protection. [/LIST] The above was mentioned in my posts and those posted by [USER=109138]Practical Response[/USER]. If we assume that points 1-5 are true, we can focus on what information can follow from the video. [LIST=1] [*]Defender protection can be slightly stronger when blocking the attack method via Certutil. [*]Blocking that method is probably uncommon among AVs on default settings (more examples needed). [*]It is unclear if Eset could improve its protection by blocking that method on default settings (the method can be only a part of a real-world attack). [*]That method is not malicious, so the decision to block it can be considered by the AV vendor if the attack can bypass other protection features. [*]That method can be potentially dangerous when the payload is undetected by the AV. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top