CyberLock 9.0

  • Thread starter Thread starter danb
  • Start date Start date
  • Featured
Also, and this has been bugging me for a long time, is it possible to actually auto re-activate Cyberlock and not just prompt the user to turn it back on? That prompt is annoying, especially when the option to automatically activate is turned on.

View attachment 296145
Can you please post a screenshot of the exact prompt that is annoying? I want to make sure I get the one you are talking about, thank you!
 
Can you please post a screenshot of the exact prompt that is annoying? I want to make sure I get the one you are talking about, thank you!

It's this one. It's useless. I'd prefer it to just re-enable, not ask first.

Screenshot 2026-03-05 214518.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: danb and Sorrento
Yes, one we release to the public, and after we wait a couple of weeks, then the auto update and update check will work. I always wait as long as possible, that way companies do not have to install the update on al of their endpoints. Thank you!

So the latest official i do have?
 
  • Like
Reactions: danb and Sorrento
It's this one. It's useless. I'd prefer it to just re-enable, not ask first.

View attachment 296180
I carefully reviewed and tweaked all of the prompts in the latest version pasted below. You should be able to disable this prompt by disabling the "Notify me after X minutes if CyberLock is off. These prompts are tricky though because we do not want to prompt if it really is not necessary, but we do want to prompt when it is necessary. But I think we have it about right... this is something we have refined over the years. Thank you!
 
Here is the latest version, it is essentially the complete 9.02 version that will be released soon. This version had tons of changes and updates, especially with the Command Line feature, so I wanted to post this version so users can try it to see if there is anything we need to tweak, while I finish implementing the new changes into our other products.

On the surface, the Command Line feature looks the same, but it is completely rewritten under the hood. The goal is to reduce Command Line blocks even further and to make the Sirius Auto HIPS function even better, and so far it seems to be working great, but if you guys have any unexpected command line blocks, please post them! FYI, the new Command Line version actually converts the command lines to a custom tokenized hash and so that comparison is much more reliable, and it is able to distinguish between exact and similar command lines even better.

CyberLock 9.01b
SHA-256: 03d5b95cef186e874dc4c73670c2881ad543ab811bfdc6cd7ff107f038ad115a
 
Hey Guys,

Here are the latest versions of our software. These should be ready for public release, but if you find anything please let me know!

The only thing I need to finish up are the CyberLock Rules, but that is going to take a while because I am completely redoing them from scratch.

CyberLock 9.02
SHA-256: c58cc75e5a5889950632e3f1f18ffadf86eacc68504afc2f4017e791bad389bd

SiriusGPT 1.02
SHA-256: 2b32120f1e1a8d8ff30df363667479ae8b04e44410281abef69ff6a1e6a28f2f

SiriusLLM 1.02
SHA-256: cfe5f3d878d86f472788fe3be9efd2e11891b82f385ed9fc89065ee629673094

DefenderUI 2.02
SHA-256: 05f61bfc42b9796ba00bd648770deb2ebc458a63838e179d4956dacf444194b0

DefenderUIPro 2.02
SHA-256: 429d77b117be2114ef6fe193db6e616d1430add386e1ff50ce807041f0f7ce3c

DefenderUISilent 2.02
SHA-256: e09a763fad4f2173ad22959998b80421834dfcc222ff53acbb19fc1ca2b23c08

WDAC Lockdown 2.02
SHA-256: 15ce36cf8de30b3e26039f0736adefcc1bb7c9055b7159fbc7fd07dc49a5d632


Thank you guys!

Dan
 
Hey Guys,

Here are the latest versions of our software. These should be ready for public release, but if you find anything please let me know!

The only thing I need to finish up are the CyberLock Rules, but that is going to take a while because I am completely redoing them from scratch.

CyberLock 9.02
SHA-256: c58cc75e5a5889950632e3f1f18ffadf86eacc68504afc2f4017e791bad389bd

SiriusGPT 1.02
SHA-256: 2b32120f1e1a8d8ff30df363667479ae8b04e44410281abef69ff6a1e6a28f2f

SiriusLLM 1.02
SHA-256: cfe5f3d878d86f472788fe3be9efd2e11891b82f385ed9fc89065ee629673094

DefenderUI 2.02
SHA-256: 05f61bfc42b9796ba00bd648770deb2ebc458a63838e179d4956dacf444194b0

DefenderUIPro 2.02
SHA-256: 429d77b117be2114ef6fe193db6e616d1430add386e1ff50ce807041f0f7ce3c

DefenderUISilent 2.02
SHA-256: e09a763fad4f2173ad22959998b80421834dfcc222ff53acbb19fc1ca2b23c08

WDAC Lockdown 2.02
SHA-256: 15ce36cf8de30b3e26039f0736adefcc1bb7c9055b7159fbc7fd07dc49a5d632


Thank you guys!

Dan

That's good, because I think the rules have needed a rebuild for a while now.
 
That's good, because I think the rules have needed a rebuild for a while now.
Yes, they need a complete rebuild ;).

BTW, I just deleted all of the Sirius results from the last 2 or so weeks that were questionable. There were only 3997 total, so that is not too bad. So for a couple of days Sirius will take a little more time analyzing samples and more tokens will be deducted, but it will be worth it in the long run. So moving forward, the verdicts will be as correct as possible and each analysis will deduct less tokens.
 
Hello,
I've installed CyberLock 9.02 on top of 9.01 but both tray bar's icons are missing (I had both CyberLock icon and Sirius icon with CyberLock 9.01). C:\Program Files\CyberLock\CyberLock.exe and C:\Program Files\CyberLock\CyberLockService.exe are running. Furthermore CyberLock.exe is constantly accessing the SSD, approximately 300,000 kb per second. I rebooted but the issue persists and both tray bar's icons are still missing so I had to manually end both processes to avoid excessive wear of SSD.

CyberLock.png
 
Last edited:
Hello,
I've installed CyberLock 9.02 on top of 9.01 but both tray bar's icons are missing (I had both CyberLock icon and Sirius icon with CyberLock 9.01). C:\Program Files\CyberLock\CyberLock.exe and C:\Program Files\CyberLock\CyberLockService.exe are running. Furthermore CyberLock.exe is constantly accessing the SSD, approximately 300,000 kb per second. I rebooted but the issue persists and both tray bar's icons are still missing so I had to manually end both processes to avoid excessive wear of SSD.

View attachment 296236
On the tray icon, you probably have to click the up arrow button to find the new tray icons. Or go into Taskbar Settings in Windows / Other System Tray Icons and make sure both of the correct CyberLock icons are enabled... there might be more than a couple.

As far as read and write to the SSD goes, CyberLock must have been doing a Sirius Scan, because that is pretty much the only time you will see SSD activity with CyberLock. Other than that, it should be quiet as a church mouse. I am monitoring mine now, and there is not a peep. So let the Sirius Scan finish, and it will calm back down.

Having said that, if you continue to have issues please send me your developer log: C:\ProgramData\CyberLock\DeveloperLog.log to support at cyberlock.global. Thank you!
 
  • +Reputation
Reactions: simmerskool
Hello Dan,
CyberLock tray bar's icon is enabled and also I've checked the up arrow button but both icons are missing. With previous version 9.01 I hadn't this issue. Indeed I was able to right click on CyberLock tray bar icon to check the Sirius scan in real-time but now I don't know what is really occurring. After 4-5 minutes I ended the process and the content of C:\ProgramData\CyberLock\DeveloperLog.log is just "[03-08-2026 23:22:49] [INFO ] - *************************** User started CyberLock 9.02 ***************************"

My OS is Windows 11 Pro 24H2 Build 26100.7840


CyberLock (1).png
 
Last edited:
I always do a fresh install for a new version, especially when background changes/improvements made. Doesn't take long at all and the initial scan only took around 5 minutes so all good. Really liking the new version and running without issue along ESET Internet Security though I usually run it with MD and DefenderUI. I'm just being indecisive on what my favourite setup is lol. Anyway, great work @danb :)
 
You could be right but until now I never had any issue to install the new version on top of the old one, especially if the main version is the same. For the moment I'll stick with 9.01 but I certainly could completely uninstall it and install 9.02, since this latest version didn't cause any problems for you. I'll think about it, thank you for the suggestion, anyway.
 
Last edited: