Steppenwolf Sang about this in the 60's or 70's but if I remember right they were singing about The government.
- Status
Steppenwolf Sang about this in the 60's or 70's but if I remember right they were singing about The government.
- Aug 17, 2017
- 1,609
Thanks for saying this, needed the balance.
It's probably more of a hobby. Also, some people always look to perfect things in life. I know I am never content with the basics and always strive to improve. Tweaking itself is sort of a hobby. For a lot of people around here security and privacy are probably hobbies. There really isn't anything wrong with that to be honest.. Someone could be sporting a man bun and have hopping douchebars as a hobby and accomplish far less.
I was long into computers before the arrival of the Timex Sinclair 1000. But me and a couple guys created one of the first adaptive text to speech systems on a Timex Sinclair 1000, many long hours of programming to be sure. Don't even get me started on BBS's and SysOp'n.. LOL PS: My cat wrote some of the earliest malware and war dialers back in the day.
Anyway, back to Cylance. It's lightweight and so far, proving effective provided the caveats are met. I like it. I have access to Sentinel One, Deep Armor and some other next-gen security products right now so it's exciting times for me.
Testing still has a purpose regardless. Such as here, missed samples are submitted to the companies, bugs found along the way are reported to the companies, this in turns helps all users using those products. It also allows users a glimpse of how the product works, something the may never see on their systems, as far as how each module performs and works in conjunction with each other. Since not all systems are the same, and each product can effect the usability and even compatibility of other applications, having such a diverse selecetion of software to chose from is obviously needed.
None of this of course matters without safe habits. If a user is risky especially those that reply to security prompts allowing a application, those that do not take time to verify what they are clicking or downloading, and do not patch their systems as they should ect, no amount of software is going to protect them, from themselves.
None of this of course matters without safe habits. If a user is risky especially those that reply to security prompts allowing a application, those that do not take time to verify what they are clicking or downloading, and do not patch their systems as they should ect, no amount of software is going to protect them, from themselves.
I never knew the 1000 had a audio option. Wow you must be at least as old or older then I. I once knew a guy over at DSLReports that made a challenge that nobody could break into his router. You kind of remind me of that person ForgottenSeer 58943. He even gave every one his IP address.
Now that is starting to sound like cruelsister lol
Unfortunately this point seems to fall on deaf ears. As Lockdown said its all about software and the next best thing. Well I'm off to download 300 more extensions and add 70 more programs to my setup, while I'm at it I''ll disable windows update as it slows down my internet when its updating.
Your "while im at it" made me spit coffee down my front lol...
and whoes deaf ears are you talking about? I am perfectly content with my setup. PLUS my router settings.
I see the person that used CAPS and small letters like the old Warez people back in the day did deleted their post.
Then you're one of the very few. Only a few are content. Most people on the security soft forums change security softs faster and more often than they change their underwear. And they promote a new soft every other day.
Far too (fanbois) many people have an emotional investment in softs. Nowhere is that truth more evident than on the security soft forums.
Dare i be the one to point out, that visiting these forums, will do that to most users, after reading how everything they do and touch will be hacked to pieces if they breath wrong striking ten fold paranoia.... lol, but seriously...
The IT security news has a vested interest in click-bait stories. Sensationalism, blowing things way out of proportion to reality, hyperbole... it all makes a lot of money for them.
Then there is always the fact that there is generally an unhealthy level of paranoia and perfectionism (unrealistic expectations) on the forum that drives a lot of it.
I completely agree with both of those.
Again you guys are crazy paranoid. Almost every single ISP supplied modem/wifi-router these days is filtering the kinds of traffic that are going to exploit vulnerabilities with a home user. You are just fine running only Cylance, or any other AV for that matter, or even no AV at all. The only core protection is up-to-date software and an adblocker.
If you have a user that's running every file, script, etc., that hits their computer, there's nothing that will protect them perfectly and leave their system usable for a novice computer user.
Cylance is decent at blocking malware, it is lightweight, and it doesn't break some of the protections already present on an up-to-date system, like SSL certs. If you have a problem with their security theater advertising, why are you singling them out as opposed to literally every single other manufacturer of anti-virus or anti-malware programs?
If you have a user that's running every file, script, etc., that hits their computer, there's nothing that will protect them perfectly and leave their system usable for a novice computer user.
Cylance is decent at blocking malware, it is lightweight, and it doesn't break some of the protections already present on an up-to-date system, like SSL certs. If you have a problem with their security theater advertising, why are you singling them out as opposed to literally every single other manufacturer of anti-virus or anti-malware programs?
Unfortunately this is basically 100% incorrect, with all due respect. Your ISP supplied router doesn't 'filter' anything. It's a simple NAT router with L3 inspection (network), and at best, a crappy SPI firewall that is totally obsolete. Gryphon is a Layer 7 home router in comparison, by the way. Also, major ISP routers are quite vulnerable, not properly updated, and almost always left on default credentials with WAN Admin access over port 80.
UN: cusadmin PW: highspeed That'll get you into almost every Comcast provided router in the country. The list of CV's on major ISP routers is quite extensive. I remember the fun one CVE-2018-10990 where sessions never expired and anyone could hop on your session into your router and change every setting they want, including binding you to a hijacked DNS. Recently during Hope X Hacker Conference experts in the field said most home routers are 'profoundly' insecure and recommended that most be simply thrown into the trash.
I actually don't think Cylance by itself will offer sufficient security when used alone on Joe User's crappy home network with a crappy $12 router.. Cylance is good. But it misses too many vectors when used without adjunct technologies that address other attack vectors. The reason why Cylance doesn't disappoint in the enterprise world is because it's sitting behind some pretty nice UTM/NGFW hardware. But under the right conditions, and with a few simple changes, a home user would be amazingly protected with it. (those caveats I keep mentioning)
Home users are not targeted like those same enterprise clients though, something that needs addressed for average home users here.
I have run windows defender for months on end, with nothing but ublock in the browser, not one infection. This is due to knowing safe habits as mentioned many times now through out a few of these threads. Tell me, as you are also a home user, that has read my recommendations in the security configuration thread, do you agree it is feasible to negate most exploitable avenues by patching OS/applications and learning to avoid social engineering for home users, let alone corporations?
Enterprise/corporate issues are often WAN facing servers, port forwards and BYOD but some of those vectors are open with home users, SSH on routers/ap's, telnet on printers, 80/443 gui's on IoT, etc.. However other attack vectors still impact home users such as malicious URL's, scripts, exploits, rats, and other things. Cylance addresses many areas of attack, but doesn't address all of them. That was my point - you may want to pair it with something else, whatever that something else is - up to the individual.
I suppose testing is in order, but the average joe might be sufficiently protected by Cylance if they simply added a nice browser filtration extension like WD for Chrome or a nice filtering DNS.. However I still would feel naked without something watching the traffic and I wouldn't be 100% confident with only-Cylance. (me personally) Heimdal makes a wonderful companion to Cylance on endpoints IMO.
I know once you reach a certain level, it becomes hard to remember what it is like to be an average user. If you did not use your home system for what you did, im sure your outlook would be different. I can show you whole towns of users that are average, use safe habits, and are fine. These geolocations see adware/pups mainly, if they see anything at all. Now 7 years ago, or longer, it was different, you seen rootkits/numerous trojans, screen locking ransomwares, but those are almost non existent now days.
Now it is just mainly social engineering... I hear more users around here dealing with spam phone calls from "microsoft" lol, then anything.
Cylance software is just a simple AV without any proactive features, dont expect it to be at the same level as some other more complete solutions.
The soft is decent in the hands of classic (not happy clicking) users, which is the main goal, the industry doesnt care of us security geeks.
Cylance marketing is crap and full of BS, aka the Unbelievable Tour where they trashed Sophos and get totally destroyed by them in return (sophos even removed the video to spare them the humiliation), that didnt went unoticed by security enthousiasts or professionals. So Cylance pay now its past arrogance.
Anyway, a good security software is the one that can fill its purpose just by itself without the need of a 3rd party.
Cylance is just supposed to detect malware landing on the system, not block them upstream, let see if it does its job.
The soft is decent in the hands of classic (not happy clicking) users, which is the main goal, the industry doesnt care of us security geeks.
Cylance marketing is crap and full of BS, aka the Unbelievable Tour where they trashed Sophos and get totally destroyed by them in return (sophos even removed the video to spare them the humiliation), that didnt went unoticed by security enthousiasts or professionals. So Cylance pay now its past arrogance.
Anyway, a good security software is the one that can fill its purpose just by itself without the need of a 3rd party.
Cylance is just supposed to detect malware landing on the system, not block them upstream, let see if it does its job.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
Similar threads
