- Jul 5, 2018
- 46
Upon default install it is already in protected mode.
You're not Lockdown. I don't believe you unless you're Lockdown. Only he knows the ins and outs of Appguard, only he can purify us all from this hell and bring salvation to the world, save the human population from unavoidable extinction and show us the light that is appguard
Also, I'm not sure how the performance test is done, but I feel my PC is faster with Microsoft Defender than it was with Kaspersky (not a placebo feeling but a real feeling, I can sense the difference of 20 ping in multiplayer games, which is 20 milliseconds, so I can definitely sense when a product is like a few hundred milliseconds faster than another, for example), even though I'm using max settings for Defender, not counting the cloud scan delay thing which obviously delays for a long time. But then again, Baseline system: Intel Core i3-4005U machine with 4GB RAM and HDD drive, that's some 1990 stuff, I know the average employee's computer is absolute trash cuz there are way too many computers, but that's like too trash, with 4gb ram you can't even turn on your computer yet alone do important business things with programs
I still don't know what the user-dependent thing is, is it smartscreen? Cuz if we include smartscreen in False Positives, every 3rd or so installation .exe/.msi file that I use when I'm updating my programs gets smart screened, if it isn't a rather-well-known (or more) signed trusted publisher, it's probably getting flagged for smart-screening, it's almost like an anti-exe in this regard
McAfee is performing like a champ on all tests, especially the real world protection and performance test, something must be wrong. I don't like the fact that the malware protection test's sample size isn't shown, as well as the fact that the settings of the products with default settings aren't shown either. I remember I tweaked a lot of things with kaspersky, it was anything but default, but I can't remember the default settings, not to mention the default ones of the products I don't use, it would be nice to see what options are missing. Like, does avast's default ones include hardened mode that I've heard of? It's also quite unfair to some products whose default settings may differ strongly with the software's maximum potential for security. Like, kaspersky's trusted applications mode is like an anti-exe, it would block like literally 100% of malware, it can't hurt you if it can't start, as long as it doesn't get randomly added to the trusted applications, this assumes kaspersky's cloud and lab to be accurate and not trust malware application, I think this is a safe bet at least. Unless it's a strong targeted 0-day exploit or something, which wouldn't get blocked anyway by any security, I remember even the mighty absolutely unstoppable completely impenetrable 100.00000% malware-proof appguard failed against the eternal blue exploit, with Lockdown's solution being "Apply the Microsoft security patch that was released within days of the exploit", well a few days is more than enough for a big company that is being targeted to get hacked cuz the security product couldn't protect it for "just" a few days before the patch is deployed. And also considering how many businesses' first thing in the morning isn't to check for new updates, at any given point there are lots of already found exploits that have been patched yet the patches haven't been deployed, will the security software protect against those? Judging by MRG Efittas' results https://www.mrg-effitas.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/MRG_Exploit_Protection.pdf the answer would be no. Maybe one day we can truly judge AVs' effectiveness by independent tests (we don't even know how independent they are), this day is not today