D
Deleted member 178
Exactly what I'm doing since years here as a member and ex-mod of the config section.Our goal here when reviewing security configs should be adding the essentials when they're lacking, or simplifying when they're overkill, not to a point where they will stop every possible infection, because that would be almost impossible, but to a point where security and performance are balanced.
If you knew or used HMPA you won't suggest to remove it, it is easier to use than Windows Exploit Guard and do more than just blocking exploits.Saying I'm wrong because I suggested to remove a program with little benefit in real world scenarios baffles me a bit - you could have explained your point of view without discrediting me.
But what makes me intervene is the way you seems to dismiss the threat.
Sorry exploits are part of the landscape, not as frequent than ransomware but still hitting people. Remember Eternalblue/doublepulsar/WannaCry hitting hundreds of thousands of machines? Not so rare, even now EB/DP they are still used. Exploits are more and more used.
In Win10 Home, you have an Anti-exploit built-in (Ex-EMET) , if the threat was negligible, MS won't add it...
Now I won't force someone to use a 3rd party anti-exploit but if he does use one, I won't tell him to remove it, and not by saying HMPA afford nothing, it is here where you are wrong. It does add to the overall security whatever you like it or not.
Sorry if you feel discriminated by my first reply, this is Umbra for you, but if you had formulated your opinion more accurately , i probably wouldnt intervened.
Itwt