Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
Emsisoft Anti Malware (default) vs Ransominator
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MacDefender" data-source="post: 876967" data-attributes="member: 83059"><p>Yeah to be clear I don't think AVs should waste their time adding signatures to block PoCs. It's a waste of time because (1) it's not a real threat, and (2) there's a million ways I could change these PoCs to have the same consequence but a signature engine would not think it's similar.</p><p></p><p>On the topic of these ransomware PoCs, it's just interesting to see how different behavior blockers and whether or not they identify this behavior.</p><p></p><p>With regards to pirated software and bundled ransomware, unfortunately, I think that tends to be a problem that the industry has created. Too often harmless keygens, Windows Activators, and other piracy tools are detected with signatures saying they're generic trojans rather than software piracy tools. Windows Defender, unsurprisingly, is one of the worst offenders here. That's created an inherent distrust of AVs trying to warn users of piracy tools.</p><p></p><p>Everything you said makes a lot of sense about the changing landscape of threats, and ransomware PoCs are simply easy to produce versus simulating the complex entry vectors for the average malware. To me the main purpose of AV software itself is to serve as a combination of a way to sanity check things I downloaded as well as serve as the last line of defense if I was stupid enough to let something unsafe onto the system. But that might not be why the average enterprise customer or average PC user uses AVs.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MacDefender, post: 876967, member: 83059"] Yeah to be clear I don't think AVs should waste their time adding signatures to block PoCs. It's a waste of time because (1) it's not a real threat, and (2) there's a million ways I could change these PoCs to have the same consequence but a signature engine would not think it's similar. On the topic of these ransomware PoCs, it's just interesting to see how different behavior blockers and whether or not they identify this behavior. With regards to pirated software and bundled ransomware, unfortunately, I think that tends to be a problem that the industry has created. Too often harmless keygens, Windows Activators, and other piracy tools are detected with signatures saying they're generic trojans rather than software piracy tools. Windows Defender, unsurprisingly, is one of the worst offenders here. That's created an inherent distrust of AVs trying to warn users of piracy tools. Everything you said makes a lot of sense about the changing landscape of threats, and ransomware PoCs are simply easy to produce versus simulating the complex entry vectors for the average malware. To me the main purpose of AV software itself is to serve as a combination of a way to sanity check things I downloaded as well as serve as the last line of defense if I was stupid enough to let something unsafe onto the system. But that might not be why the average enterprise customer or average PC user uses AVs. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top