Emsisoft A.M & E.I.S now include Exploit Protection

[Nightwalker]

Emsisoft doesnt need to drop Bitdefender engine, it is simple the "best" SDK considering "cost x protection x speed x false positives x support x updates x integrability with in-house engine".

Bitdefender is the best SDK player, there is no other vendor that comes close.

Kaspersky for example doesnt deliver the last engine for third part and isnt flexible enough (Kaspersky terms doesnt allow Emsisoft to have free products), ESET doesnt want to license their engine, Avira third part engine has serious problems with updates and Dr Web engine is too complex to integrate with Emsisoft in-house engine.

Emsisoft in-house engine complements Bitdefender engine flawless, with superb PUA detection (only ESET comes close) and false positive safeguard. Emsisoft uses the last Bitdefender engine with full heuristics and B-HAVE emulator, can fix false positives, can mirror the BD updates in real time and much more, no other vendor allow this.

Fabian Wosar could have explained a lot better than me, but dont worry guys, the Emsisoft team really knows what they are doing.

 

[Solarquest]

I'm very, very happy Emsi decided at the end to add an anti-exploit! This was a great news!
They didn't want for compatibility reasons with other AV, luckily they changed their mind!

I now hope they add a better surf/badurl protection, not only based on signatures but on heuristics and BB;
a better heuristic malware detection and more/better generic signatures for family type of malware;
the possibility to submit suspicious files for a deep/sandboxed analysis (e.g with a shell integration in IE). It would be great to see EMSI sending suspicious files on the cloud by itself (as Zemana, HMP, Reason core etc).

About detection on scan I know detection ratio is not consistent, it vary every time.
I undestand that Emsi cannot switch between AV engines every time the detection on scan by one engine gets worse than another one they could use.
It's somehow sad to see now Kaspersky engine detecting more than Bitdefender's one, but this was different in the past and might change in the future.
The important is Emsisoft's engine add what Bitdefender's one misses.

In my opinion, Emsisoft with anti-exe and an anti-exe offer a really solid protection.
Emsisoft, keep on going with the great work!

 

[Azure]

Emsisoft doesnt need to drop Bitdefender engine, it is simple the "best" SDK considering "cost x protection x speed x false positives x support x updates x integrability with in-house engine".

Bitdefender is the best SDK player, there is no other vendor that comes close.

Kaspersky for example doesnt deliver the last engine for third part and isnt flexible enough (Kaspersky terms doesnt allow Emsisoft to have free products), ESET doesnt want to license their engine, Avira third part engine has serious problems with updates and Dr Web engine is too complex to integrate with Emsisoft in-house engine.

Emsisoft in-house engine complements Bitdefender engine flawless, with superb PUA detection (only ESET comes close) and false positive safeguard. Emsisoft uses the last Bitdefender engine with full heuristics and B-HAVE emulator, can fix false positives, can mirror the BD updates in real time and much more, no other vendor allow this.

Fabian Wosar could have explained a lot better than me, but dont worry guys, the Emsisoft team really knows what they are doing.

I do wonder if that will still remain true even when Kaspersky releases their free antivirus...

 

[Online_Sword]

B-HAVE emulator

B-HAVE!?
The technique used by the Active Virus Control module (AVC, now called Active Threat Control in v2016) !?
In the past, I thought it was a key technique and would not be sold to other companies easily...
The only 3rd-party antivirus I knew that could use the AVC module of Bitdefender was MicroWood eScan.

 

[Deleted member 178]

Emsi moved from Ikarus (very strong heuristic) to BD because BD has far less Fps , they choose reliability , and this is the way they want EIS/EAM to be. Before Emsi was the favorite Geek's vendor like comodo (awesome Firewall & HIPS of Online Armor, top notch scanner of EAM; if you had the combo properly configured as i did , almost nothing can breached it.) .

my biggest regret is that they abandoned OA... but business is business , complexity doesn't fit with big market shares...beginners wont use and understand OA.

 

[omidomi]

use Dr.Web or Kaspersky engine is good
Bitdefender engine is a little buggy at all

 

[Deleted member 178]

use Dr.Web or Kaspersky engine is good
Bitdefender engine is a little buggy at all

BD engine is the best one out-there another security vendor can buy, their signature are good and they gives you access of the latest engine version unlike others that gives you the previous version only.

 

[omidomi]

BD engine is the best one out-there another security vendor can buy, their signature are good and they gives you access of the latest engine version unlike others that gives you the previous version only.

oh really?
but i see in malware hub ZoneAlarm result same as kaspersky...
but yup your knowledge base more than me

 

[Deleted member 178]

oh really?
but i see in malware hub ZoneAlarm result same as kaspersky...
but yup your knowledge base more than me

from what i recall, Zone Alarm uses Kasperky engine

 

[kiric96]

B-HAVE!?
The technique used by the Active Virus Control module (AVC, now called Active Threat Control in v2016) !?
In the past, I thought it was a key technique and would not be sold to other companies easily...
The only 3rd-party antivirus I knew that could use the AVC module of Bitdefender was MicroWood eScan.

AVC or AVT is pretty much different from the heuristic they use in signatures... this module works different as it evaluates differents things of a program, if the given program do something that raises the flag of suspiciousness then AVC will do something, the problem here is that since bitdefender is always in autopilot (no matter which setting you touch) and they dont want to bother the user, they adjust it at a level that will miss too much stuff. Actually before windows 8 rolled out that AVC module had a lot of problems with the new OS, since then i may say they have improved a lot.

Signatures heuristics in the other hand are different if you want to know when heuristic are used the look for the name "Deep.scan....." or something related, those are the named that are used within the scanning engine to detect new malware.

oh really?
but i see in malware hub ZoneAlarm result same as kaspersky...
but yup your knowledge base more than me

being honest, zonealarm some times will take a big delay to grab all signatures from kaspersky me personally have confirmed this, most of the time a file that is detected via signatures with kaspersky, will take up to 24 hours to be in zemana detection list, as others said before almost no AV will sell the latest engine to third party companies...

however from time to time we see that despite the fact emsisoft grabs the lates updates for some reason there are times that a single malware is not in emsisoft detection list but it is in bitdefender one... dont worry BB is there to protect you

 

[Secondmineboy]

@Umbra : The Firewall in EIS is basically backing up Online Armor, and they improved their BB alot as well so its not really a concern

 

[Deleted member 178]

@Umbra : The Firewall in EIS is basically backing up Online Armor

not much, they used a fraction of OA's code and build it from scratch; i was testing it when it was just a command line FW using cmd lol^^