BitDefender TrafficLight (BETA)

[jamescv7]

Not bad well when it comes official surely it will improved, I expect it must detect higher than 18/30.

 

[MrXidus]

@james I also expect false positives to be fixed.

 

[jamescv7]

Yeah its since its beta let's take their time to fixed FP and even their detection from malicious sites.

 

[Jack]

Just installed this plugin for Chrome....@MrXidus Seems like Bitdenfer has the same problem with FP .... I've tried to go to http://www.revouninstaller.com/revo_uninstaller_free_download.html and I've got blocked

 

[MrXidus]

Someones got to fix that FP soon, I wonder if the admins of Revo know that TrafficLight is blocking there website.

 

[McLovin]

Bitdefender need to fix that false positive. Being the same website that is bad.

 

[Ink]

You can leave comment on their website (Disqus), there looks to be someone moderating the discussion by the name of "Daniel Manolache" (links to his FB, says works for BitDefender).

http://trafficlight.bitdefender.com/

 

[Guest28]

My experience with this i could not boot up my machine. had to go into safe mode to remove it. :thumbsdown:

 

[Ramblin]

I tried both, the installer and the Firefox addon, about a month ago.
The installer was very heavy but the Firefox addon worked very well
and it did not slow me down at all. The installer made my all around
memory go very high but the FF addon was very light. There were
some compatibility issues with NoScript but last time that I tried the
addon, it worked very well and the compatibility issue had been fixed.
How good this thing is? I don't know, but I think Bit Defender is doing
what it takes to make it better.

Bo

---

My experience with this i could not boot up my machine. had to go into safe mode to remove it. :thumbsdown:

Thats bad news, sorry to hear that.

 

[Guest28]

from what i'v seen in Bitdefender 2012 beta the traffic light looks different it appears to me as the free version such as this one is stripped down.

 

[Deleted member 178]

when i installed it , it did strictly nothing, cant even configure it, so i removed it ^^

 

[NathanF1]

I installed it on a netbook yesterday [using Opera, so the web installer was the way to go] and to me it's a case of technology running rampant - it updated after installation, downloading 127 MB[?!], the folder size swelling to 380 MB!
According to BD support, the main difference between the extension and the full install is that the full version will scan the HTTP traffic with both Antiphishing & Malware engines [locally stored signatures explain the monstrous download], as well as cloud detection; the add-on will only utilize cloud detection and Antiphishing - Link

Also, BD admit that their cloud services aren't as large as some others, so they're relying a lot on HTTP scanning to cover for this at the moment - Link

In version 1.5.0.201 they list 4 components:
- Add Filter
- Advanced Phishing Filter
- Malware Filter
- Search Results Analyzer [SRA]

It seems that there are a few other place holders in the add-on, such as "AntiFraud Filter", so obviously there will be more to come.

Strangely enough, clicking on the "Add Blocker" icon [feature not implemented yet] turns TrafficLight OFF. The search results are displayed almost instantly, but the analyzer takes long time to verify links/scan pages. Slows browsing down noticeably on this entry level configuration [single-core Intel Atom N455]. Turning it off... soon.

 

[NathanF1]

In comparison, the browser add-on that ships with BitDefender 2012 lists the following under Settings:

- Antiphishing Filter
- Antimalware Filter
- Search Advisor

It doesn't have the URL shortening, the option to share TrafficLight [on Facebook, Twitter and StumbleUpon], as well as the feedback/issue reporting [free form text for feedback or reporting broken page, if not dispayed correctly], which are currently available in TrafficLight BETA.

 

[Hungry Man]

Got this running on my mother's computer.

 

[NathanF1]

4 days later the folder size has grown to 705 MB! Suppose it's the price to pay for having the host engine and signatures. Another drawback to this is that TrafficLight does use a fair bit of resources - I've had it peak at 20-25% CPU and substantial disk I/O activity.

I have to admit, I respect BitDefender's philosophy and technical approach, the design is fresh and a welcome departure from traditional toolbars, but once again, the execution lacks some performance finesse.

 

[jamescv7]

Just using Trafficlight in linux with Search Analyzer off with WOT. So for example a site was unknown for WOT then Trafficlight will do the job.

 

[jamescv7]

Reminder only because Trafficlight beta was not compatible to the newly released Firefox 6.

 

[NathanF1]

I use it with FF 6 - no issues at all, same for WebRep [with compatibility check OFF].

 

[jamescv7]

Same, so far there is no issues when Trafficlight was running on a incompatibility mode.

 

[Lindows]

It is a good addon..... But it slowed my connection a bit in Firefox 6 and IE 9....