Differences Eset vs. CIS & how to get Eset license activated?

[Nirv5668]

So I won Eset in a giveaway, really excited, and trying to decide what computer to install on. On my main laptop, I am using CIS (proactive config, firewall-custom, small tweaks) and really like it. I am trying to decide whether to try Eset on main PC or on my brother's gaming PC (more advanced user than I am, so probably would be fine with Eset, but also more interested in games than AV toys )

If anyone is familiar with both- what are the key differences between Eset and Comodo? For example, It seems that Eset has built in exploit protection...but not sure on other key differences. Anything I would be giving up with Comodo (virtual kiosk, auto-sandbox, etc.)? Also, any experience with Eset and gaming?

Thanks everyone!

 

[hjlbx]

When you look closely at Comodo and ESET they have only slight differences... of which you are already aware.

ESET's real advantage is better surf protections and signatures whereas Comodo has the integrated auto-sandboxing feature.

Both have an anti-bot exploit feature... not really a complete anti-exploit capability like MBAE or HMPA.

Both have a gaming mode which suppresses alerts and notifications.

Performance-wise I see little difference between Comodo and ESET; both have acceptable system impact.

It is highly likely that if you enjoy using Comodo you will also enjoy ESET.

 

[jamescv7]

Simply CIS is more on the maintainance tweak than ESET, so for better straightforward setup then go for the license you've won Preferably put it on gaming pc since the main intensive task are games.

If you want to play the powerful configuration like Virtusl kiosk, autosandbox and HIPS then go for CIS (main PC).

 

[Nico@FMA]

So I won Eset in a giveaway, really excited, and trying to decide what computer to install on. On my main laptop, I am using CIS (proactive config, firewall-custom, small tweaks) and really like it. I am trying to decide whether to try Eset on main PC or on my brother's gaming PC (more advanced user than I am, so probably would be fine with Eset, but also more interested in games than AV toys )

If anyone is familiar with both- what are the key differences between Eset and Comodo? For example, It seems that Eset has built in exploit protection...but not sure on other key differences. Anything I would be giving up with Comodo (virtual kiosk, auto-sandbox, etc.)? Also, any experience with Eset and gaming?

Now, really stupid question: anyone know how to get the license from the giveaway? I got PM saying I won one, replied, but didn't hear back again. I looked through the giveaway and didn't see instructions but maybe I missed them. I haven't done/won giveaways here before so no idea if I am supposed to contact Eset or somehow use account info or what. Is there some standard protocol for this that I am missing?

Thanks everyone!

Just for the record eset smart security also uses a sandbox environment:

Smart Security Antivirus is built on ESET's existing ThreatSense technology which encompasses an advanced heuristics engine which allows the software to proactively monitor and detect malware not covered by other signature based antivirus packages. The software decodes and analyses each executable in real time using an emulated environment. By allowing this execution to take place within a sandbox (protected) environment ESET NOD32 Smart Security can clearly differentiate between normal files and files cleverly disguised as malware.

It must be noted that CIS versus ESET is a battle on its own, since both products are not in the same league.
Where CIS aims for network protection and the AV is just a bonus. Eset goes for total protection, where individual tools within the program might differ from quality yet as a whole it does a much better job then CIS. Generally can be said that eset's firewall is no good compared to CIS, yet the firewall as a module within their program has great backup and potentially way more stopping power then CIS this is not to the credit of the firewall but more to the credit of other features within the program.
So without doing CIS discredit they are being put on the side line by eset...

 

[ifacedown]

Just for the record eset smart security also uses a sandbox environment:

Smart Security Antivirus is built on ESET's existing ThreatSense technology which encompasses an advanced heuristics engine which allows the software to proactively monitor and detect malware not covered by other signature based antivirus packages. The software decodes and analyses each executable in real time using an emulated environment. By allowing this execution to take place within a sandbox (protected) environment ESET NOD32 Smart Security can clearly differentiate between normal files and files cleverly disguised as malware.

It must be noted that CIS versus ESET is a battle on its own, since both products are not in the same league.
Where CIS aims for network protection and the AV is just a bonus. Eset goes for total protection, where individual tools within the program might differ from quality yet as a whole it does a much better job then CIS. Generally can be said that eset's firewall is no good compared to CIS, yet the firewall as a module within their program has great backup and potentially way more stopping power then CIS this is not to the credit of the firewall but more to the credit of other features within the program.
So without doing CIS discredit they are being put on the side line by eset...

Wow! I never thought ESET SS have these awesome features!

 

[Nico@FMA]

Wow! I never thought ESET SS have these awesome features!

Well its pretty much the same idea that my own malware engine uses. Infact the framework comes from exactly the same vendor (Eset did not develop their own cloud framework (a third party did which is the same party we used for our framework) the CBAD principle is pretty muchy the same as esets the only differences is that we both use a different algorithm, where eset is more ahead with traditional emulating we peak at NextG emulating (Patent pending) So i am kinda baffled by your reaction as lots of AV programs use the same features but just call it a different name or make it partnered with a different tool.

 

[Nirv5668]

Awesome advice everyone, thanks so much for your input! Great information here. It actually sounds like they have some similarities, or attract a similar user. And I have the license from MT Eset sounds great- this was one I had never heard of before reading forums etc.

Any difference in terms of stopping RATs, keyloggers...basically if you wanted to access a specific person's computer, which would be easier to find a way around? This might not be a different question than any other sort of protection, not sure.

I think its going on the gaming PC, unless he can't give up MSE , then I will put it on my main PC. I think he is concerned any other AV will slow down the system too much. I don't know, looking at av-comparatives etc. on performance, it doesn't seem like MSE is as light as I assumed. His last non-MSE AV was McAfee or Norton years ago and I think it did not go well performance wise.

It must be noted that CIS versus ESET is a battle on its own, since both products are not in the same league.
Where CIS aims for network protection and the AV is just a bonus. Eset goes for total protection, where individual tools within the program might differ from quality yet as a whole it does a much better job then CIS. Generally can be said that eset's firewall is no good compared to CIS, yet the firewall as a module within their program has great backup and potentially way more stopping power then CIS this is not to the credit of the firewall but more to the credit of other features within the program.
So without doing CIS discredit they are being put on the side line by eset...

This is interesting, it sounds like there is more to firewalls than I assumed. I was thinking about this today, if there could/should/is some sort of real-time heuristic component for firewalls (this probably exists...and I had no idea). Do they have definitions of any kind, like sites that data should not be sent out to or is this handled by AV component? Am I correct in thinking a firewall is just a set of rules? If you configure the rules in Eset to match Comodo's, wouldn't you get the same Firewall or Is it doing some sort of traffic analysis as well or is one more easily shutdown by malware?

So i am kinda baffled by your reaction as lots of AV programs use the same features but just call it a different name or make it partnered with a different tool.

I actually didn't realize this either- or suspected something like this went on, but couldn't figure it out . I would think every AV would want to list every feature, separate the ones combined into one tool, to show how much it does. Maybe many people wouldn't read the whole list, but they would see a lot of items. I would love to be able to find a technical description that describes what the company specific terms mean or what they basically do on a technical level, but maybe this gives too much away to competitors. It would be really interesting to have some sort of chart showing whether the feature exists/what its name is, in each AV. Maybe there is a way to start that on here...

Both have an anti-bot exploit feature... not really a complete anti-exploit capability like MBAE or HMPA.

Ok, good to know, I saw anti-exploit and thought that meant application exploit. I thought I heard/read that Eset was not compatible with MBAE b/c of their own exploit? It will be interesting to see if it conflicts. I didn't realize bots were a problem on any computer with any AV...their actions sound like they would be easy to spot, but maybe I underestimated them. Although sometimes reading the features of AV, I am wondering if some feature is unique to that product or they just bothered to mention it...kind of related to what Nico@FMA mentioned...its hard to easily compare feature by feature

 

[Nico@FMA]

This is interesting, it sounds like there is more to firewalls than I assumed. I was thinking about this today, if there could/should/is some sort of real-time heuristic component for firewalls (this probably exists...and I had no idea). Do they have definitions of any kind, like sites that data should not be sent out to or is this handled by AV component? Am I correct in thinking a firewall is just a set of rules? If you configure the rules in Eset to match Comodo's, wouldn't you get the same Firewall or Is it doing some sort of traffic analysis as well or is one more easily shutdown by malware?

Well Eset Smart Security uses a firewall, and if i am not mistaken it amplifies windows firewall with a whole new set of rules and with anti-malware detection trough webtraffic. And no if you place the rules from both packages into one package then this would mean that the firewall becomes useless, for the plain and simple reason that the firewall itself is completely different. It is not just some standalone tool you can take out of the program. Specially in eset's case, the firewall is just as much bind to the malware engine as its other functions.
The strength of ESET comes from the whole package and not just some tool alone.
This same applies more or less for CIS.

Most people think of a firewall like the early 2003/2004/2005 yet today firewalls have become little wonders as the point where they just served as a firewall are LONG gone. Some firewalls have better malware detection then the very scan engine itself.
Just to point our a small little detail. So i am not sure where you going with your questions, but it might not be a bad idea to read up a bit on the net about how things work.

Cheers

 

[hjlbx]

Any difference in terms of stopping RATs, keyloggers...basically if you wanted to access a specific person's computer, which would be easier to find a way around? This might not be a different question than any other sort of protection, not sure.

ESET is more likely to stop a known malicious RAT or keylogger for which there is already a signature than CIS due to its better signature database.

An undetected, hidden install of a RAT or keylogger is going to be a challenge for most AVs, but ESET and CIS HIPS can detect and alert to various accesses and system changes (but that isn't the whole picture). Not much gets past HIPS but what the infos in HIPS alerts means to the user is an entirely different matter - and is at the root of the user allowing or blocking an object.

A knowledgeable, experienced, attentive user will likely pick-up on such alerts but to a novice those alerts essentially mean nothing.

Overall - as a complete package - ESET is a better, more refined product.

 

[Nirv5668]

Most people think of a firewall like the early 2003/2004/2005 yet today firewalls have become little wonders as the point where they just served as a firewall are LONG gone. Some firewalls have better malware detection then the very scan engine itself.
Just to point our a small little detail. So i am not sure where you going with your questions, but it might not be a bad idea to read up a bit on the net about how things work.

Cheers

Just curious, this answers my question, thank you for the great info. I think I probably read older information- I will definitely look for some more. Very good to hear that it is more advanced!

ESET is more likely to stop a known malicious RAT or keylogger for which there is already a signature than CIS due to its better signature database.

An undetected, hidden install of a RAT or keylogger is going to be a challenge for most AVs, but ESET and CIS HIPS can detect and alert to various accesses and system changes (but that isn't the whole picture). Not much gets past HIPS but what the infos in HIPS alerts means to the user is an entirely different matter - and is at the root of the user allowing or blocking an object.

A knowledgeable, experienced, attentive user will likely pick-up on such alerts but to a novice those alerts essentially mean nothing.

Overall - as a complete package - ESET is a better, more refined product.

That makes sense- this is where the signature database does matter, I guess...otherwise one is left making decisions. I don't get many, when I do I google. I know a lot of people who just completely ignore warnings from AV, yet purchase and AV suite every year. Observing this all I could think was 'what is the point of paying for this and then overriding everything it does?' So, even knowing nothing, I payed attention to alerts. But I can imagine CIS HIPS not always working, even with a careful user. I could certainly be fooled sooner or later. Thanks for all the info- I learn so much here

 

[hjlbx]

The best way to use CIS is to configure your system the way you want it; install the apps that you will keep, white-list them in CIS, then activate all of CIS default-deny settings including HIPS.

On my system it is rare that I get a HIPS alerts. Generally it is only when something out of the ordinary is happening.

Best way to learn CIS is to practice with a lot of different files - including malwares. Turn HIPS paranoid mode on a clean system and just watch the HIPS alerts - read them carefully and then - select "Allow."

CIS is better than people think, but it does have its weaknesses.