- May 10, 2019
- 2,289
Hello,
This is my simple, chaos-free security config for 2024. Looking forward to hearing your opinions.
This is my simple, chaos-free security config for 2024. Looking forward to hearing your opinions.
Nice description, indeed. I had to laugh after reading some of the recent and recurring threads.chaos-free security config
Same thing I was thinking, or along with EEK, use one or two of the above.Nice simple config. Thanks for sharing.
Only one thing to add, instead of EEK use NPE and/or KVRT.
Tbh most of the security configs here are overkill. I prefer speed and stability over over exaggerated security (which in my opinion translate to paranoia).Nice description, indeed. I had to laugh after reading some of the recent and recurring threads.
Malwarebytes is great. I know some would argue it should not be used as the main protection. But for me its web protection is great and it covers the main attack vector. I am not fond of online tests.Actually first time i see malwarebytes used in MalwareTips configs
Good config , pretty much and i see youre waterfox enjoyer
Tbh I do not need any second-opinion scanners. I do not install new software on this laptop and I have all my files backed up to my external HDD on a weekly basis. The most important files are synced to the cloud in realtime with end-to-end encryption using Kooft Vault.Nice simple config. Thanks for sharing.
Only one thing to add, instead of EEK use NPE and/or KVRT.
I only run EEK scans for fun every once in a while.Same thing I was thinking, or along with EEK, use one or two of the above.
Edit:
App Review - An Emsisoft Emergency Kit Quickie
malwaretips.comSerious Discussion - Which on-demand scanner is the most thorough?
Not all complaints are true. Norton for more than 15 years has been offering an up-to-date removal tool. Last I knew NPE was portable and did not require direct installation. Has this changed over time?malwaretips.com
WinnerTbh most of the security configs here are overkill. I prefer speed and stability over over exaggerated security (which in my opinion translate to paranoia).
You should second this post then as I'm curious how it would result. I've ran machines with nothing but windows defaults and ublock in the browser for long periods of time and been fine.Nice description, indeed. I had to laugh after reading some of the recent and recurring threads.
AgreeNice simple config. Thanks for sharing.
Only one thing to add, instead of EEK use NPE and/or KVRT.
I'm using Windows Hello PIN. My laptop does not have fingerprint scanner.How did you enable "Biometrics (Windows Hello PIN, TouchID, Face, Iris, Fingerprint)" on Lenovo Legion 5, I thought it is not compatible, here is mine:
View attachment 284752
I found that I can only use PIN if I'm signed into my MSA. Once signed in on my administrator account, I create a local user account. So both accounts with PIN. No biometrics available on my cheapo Lenovo laptop.How did you enable "Biometrics (Windows Hello PIN, TouchID, Face, Iris, Fingerprint)" on Lenovo Legion 5, I thought it is not compatible, here is mine:
View attachment 284752
Its web protection is great, so it follows that is the main feature you rely on, as you point out above about browser being the most vulnerable attack point.Malwarebytes is great. .... But for me its web protection is great and it covers the main attack vector.
Of course, this is the usual view about MBAM, and users fail to understand them with any sense or nuance.I know some would argue it should not be used as the main protection. ... I am not fond of online tests.
I do understand that MB does not have the best engine nor top notch signatures. I also know that its behavioural detection is supbar, but I do trust its web protection.Its web protection is great, so it follows that is the main feature you rely on, as you point out above about browser being the most vulnerable attack point.
Of course, this is the usual view about MBAM, and users fail to understand them with any sense or nuance.
If someone were to use MB just for the web protection why not just use MB Browser Guard instead?Its web protection is great, so it follows that is the main feature you rely on, as you point out above about browser being the most vulnerable attack point.
Of course, this is the usual view about MBAM, and users fail to understand them with any sense or nuance.
I think either I was not clear or you misunderstood me, but I totally agree with you. My remarks were about other, average users, or even some members.I do understand that MB does not have the best engine nor top notch signatures. I also know that its behavioural detection is supbar, but I do trust its web protection.
I have a lifetime license, so why waste it?
AVG/Avast with Hardened Mode enabled is my second option.
Doesn't it have built in web protection without the extension?If someone were to use MB just for the web protection why not just use MB Browser Guard instead?
MB web protections offers more protectionIf someone were to use MB just for the web protection why not just use MB Browser Guard instead?
It does and it blocks connection to malicious hosts.Doesn't it have built in web protection without the extension?
That's what I thought. I like MBAM for the same reasons as you, except for the bloatware they've added to the new version. And it's made in the U.S.It does and it blocks connection to malicious hosts.