SecureAPlus is Evolving

[Av Gurus]

Before we unleash the New SecureAPlus to the world, we'd like to let you try it out and let us know what you think.

A Newer & Streamlined SecureAPlus UI

On our most recent survey, 24% of you thought that our interface could use some work. We couldn't agree more.

The SecureAPlus team is elevating the interface to make using our powerful features a whole lot easier and responsive.

Real-Time Scanning & Notifications at a Glance
When 38% of you said to improve handling of false positives, we took that to heart.
We will be significantly lowering false positives with the introduction of Real-Time On-Demand Scanning sometime during the Beta so do look forward to that.
We hope to significantly lower cases of false positives with a finely tuned Real Time On-Demand Scanning during the Beta so do look forward to that.

Universal AV remains our most popular feature with its power to improve detection rates and conduct fast full system scans.

But it can be overwhelming to some. So we're introducing Notifications at a Glance - a more visual and convenient way of displaying Universal AV and VirusTotal results to the user.

This makes it easier to confidently react to potential threats that are blocked or detected by SecureAPlus.

We will be releasing further details about the Beta soon so make sure to register your interest as early as now.

 

[Alex BK]

Cool looking UI. I really like SecureAPlus, fair product with good protection. What I'm expecting from them is a firewall, but the UI and some protection improvements is the first step I believe.

 

[Enju]

Too many pictures and colors, looks a bit distracting imo.

 

[Janl92l]

Use secureaplus for along time now and the new ui is a big improvment for me. nice job there i like it. Hope i can test the beta soon in a vm.

 

[Andrew999]

is it stable enough to run on my main machine

 

[OneDay]

The coloring in the main UI is quite good, but regarding the notifications it seems a little bit childish.
I understand however their effort to make application whitelisting more approachable to typical users. Great program all around and I hope they improve a lot more.

 

[sonylxn]

Too many pictures and colors, looks a bit distracting imo.

agree.
but i like it anyways

 

[Janl92l]

Anyone know a time when the public beta comes out?

 

[Online_Sword]

Why does SAP still depend on the result of virustotal, when it has its own UAV?

 

[OneDay]

Why does SAP still depend on the result of virustotal, when it has its own UAV?

Actually it is a combination of the two methods. And UAV works mostly in real-time, while VirusTotal reports are used when an application that's not in the whitelist is blocked to help the user make an informed decision.

 

[sinu]

It could be much better but anyway Changes are good

 

[trhd03twth]

Too many pictures and colors, looks a bit distracting imo.

Agree. I prefer the old UI, this new one hurts my eyes.

 

[MalwareT]

This UI is awful,i prefer old one. Looks like XCore Crystal Protection. Anyways,my choice will always be NoVirusThanks products.

 

[SpartacusSystem]

Looking good, I like software that has a bit of eye-candy.

 

[Online_Sword]

@OneDay , thank you for your reply.

UAV works mostly in real-time, while VirusTotal reports are used when an application that's not in the whitelist is blocked to help the user make an informed decision.

Does this mean that, UAV does not directly participate into the anti-exe module of SAP?
If so, would SAP be running like this when user double clicks an executable file "test.exe":

if (test.exe is identified as malware by UAV AND/OR local av engine)

block test.exe;​

else
{

if(test.exe has already been in the whitelist OR test.exe is digitally signed)

allow test.exe to run;​

else
{

if(the hash code of test.exe has already been stored in virustotal)

show a prompt of the corresponding detection ratio;​

else

show a prompt to ask the user whether or not to send the file to virustotal;​

}​

}

Would this be correct?

​

 

[OneDay]

@Online_Sword

When you first install SAP it takes a snapshot of your system and creates a whitelist. Everything new (safe or malware) will be blocked. If you run a program that's not in the whitelist (of YOUR system) it will be blocked except in the case of its digital signature being included in the list of Trusted certificates. If UAV finds the file malicious (when you download it, for example) it will prompt you to delete/quarantine it. If it doesn't find it malicious, then the procedure goes the way you described it above, with the help of VirusTotal.

 

[Online_Sword]

@Online_Sword
except in the case of its digital signature being included in the list of Trusted certificates.

I guess this means not every digitally signed file would be allowed to run?

@Online_Sword
If it doesn't find it malicious, then the procedure goes the way you described it above, with the help of VirusTotal.

If I allow this file to run in such case, would it be automatically added to the whitelist?

Thank you very much for your reply.

 

[OneDay]

I guess this means not every digitally signed file would be allowed to run?

Exactly. You can even choose to trust a program if its certificate and thumbprint is in the trusted list which means, for example, that HitmanPro would be allowed and HitmanPro.Alert would be blocked even though they're both digitally signed by Surfright. That's more of a hassle though and I wouldn't recommend it.

 

[OneDay]

If I allow this file to run in such case, would it be automatically added to the whitelist?

You can either unblock it for once or treat it as a trusted installer in which case it is added in the whitelist.

 

[Alex BK]

Why does SAP still depend on the result of virustotal, when it has its own UAV?

Is it a bad thing to use VT? Definitely NO. In fact it is great to see the "opinion" from multiple scanners, you know, to make the best decision.