Emsisoft feedback thread

[Deleted member 178]

Hello,

I created this thread so you can give us informative and concrete feedbacks (comments, suggestions, etc...) about our products.

Don't forget our support forum where you can post feedbacks as well :
Feedback, Comments and Suggestions

Thank you

 

[Deleted member 178]

Feedback thread on Emsisoft website about the migration from EIS to EAM.

Emsisoft Internet Security migration feedback

Thank you

 

[dinosaur07]

First thing to note is that you have a very good customer care and Thomas Ott from you deserves a + from my side. Regarding EAM i like its BB.

 

[motox781]

Build in a good whitelisting solution and I might give it a try. At the moment, Emsisoft doesn't have much to offer from other manufacturers.Work on the pricing too. Need a 10 user license? ...$200...ouch ;(

Wasn't trying to bash Emsisoft, sorry if it came off that way.

 

[Aktiffiso]

I love Emsi BB, I like the support who bring me. Price and value are ok for me. Thomas Ott or David are both good guys

 

[RoboMan]

Give us more tweaking options for your Windows product

 

[Aktiffiso]

Emsisoft have preference on Malware tips Umbra on malware tips go for emsisoft now ñ ñ

 

[CoherentCrayon]

If an unsigned application adds itself to startup, Emsisoft immediately shows a "suspicious application" warning with quarantine option. While this is very bad if the program executes malicious code, adding itself to startup is in itself not dangerous. So, IMO Emsisoft should show what suspicious thing the application is trying to do in the warning so you can decide for yourself. Otherwise the BB is really good

 

[XhenEd]

Emsisoft have preference on Malware tips

Not really.

MT, after all, is about "tips and malware".

 

[Deleted member 65228]

I think the BB is a little bit too sensitive for unsigned applications. If an unsigned application adds itself to startup, Emsisoft immediately shows a "suspicious application" warning with quarantine option. IMO Emsisoft should show what suspicious thing the application is trying to do in the warning. Otherwise the BB is really good

That is the point of the Behavior Blocker?

It is common for malware to add itself to start-up so it can run its code on the next boot and not just for that session where the infection was initially deployed, therefore it alerts you of a monitored program doing just that - it is down to you as the user to make a decision.

You can manually white-list programs you trust whether they are signed or not if the Emsisoft BB is intervening.

 

[RoboMan]

That is the point of the Behavior Blocker?

It is common for malware to add itself to start-up so it can run its code on the next boot and not just for that session where the infection was initially deployed, therefore it alerts you of a monitored program doing just that - it is down to you as the user to make a decision.

You can manually white-list programs you trust whether they are signed or not if the Emsisoft BB is intervening.

Maybe implement interactive and smart (automatic) mode for Behaviour Blocker?

 

[CoherentCrayon]

That is the point of the Behavior Blocker?

It is common for malware to add itself to start-up so it can run its code on the next boot and not just for that session where the infection was initially deployed, therefore it alerts you of a monitored program doing just that - it is down to you as the user to make a decision.

You can manually white-list programs you trust whether they are signed or not if the Emsisoft BB is intervening.

Yeah, but the BB should in my opinion display what suspicious thing the application is trying to do. Adding itself to start-up itself is not dangerous itself, but combined with malicious code it is. That's what I meant with my post basically

/steel9

 

[Deleted Member 3a5v73x]

More detailed information in BB, what specific actions were done by program X. (I want to see modified registry keys, altered settings, accesed files etc.)

 

[Deleted member 178]

If an unsigned application adds itself to startup, Emsisoft immediately shows a "suspicious application" warning with quarantine option. While this is very bad if the program executes malicious code, adding itself to startup is in itself not dangerous. So, IMO Emsisoft should show what suspicious thing the application is trying to do in the warning so you can decide for yourself. Otherwise the BB is really good

The BB by default is set to "Auto-Resolve", but nothing forbid you to set it to '"Alert".

 

[CoherentCrayon]

The BB by default is set to "Auto-Resolve", but nothing forbid you to set it to '"Alert".

If you set it to Alert, does it still auto-allow "Safe" applications in the Reputation network and still auto-quarantine applications rated as "Unsafe" by the Reputation network?

/steel9

 

[insanity]

Emsisoft changed the BB default to auto-resolve a few months ago and I actually approved. Before, we were presented with a conspicuous and large window with three options popping up all of a sudden. Now there is much less annoyance.

 

[Miyagi]

PRICE. Generations now value online discounts/coupons. Look at Amazon and how other retailers are closing down. You can get top tier AV's for $20 for 5 PC's when they have discounts. How people pay more astonishes me when you can just research a bit online.

 

[AlanOstaszewski]

I seriously do not know from where the Emisosft hype comed. Emsisoft isn't a innovation in my eyes.
Please don't understand me wrong. Emsisoft isn't "perfect" but many members of this forum are blessing this software. No software is perfect but Kaspersky Lab is more perfect for less money. You can say to me that Emsisoft has a good behavior blocker. So it is. But the competitors are offering better software for fewer money. Or do you want to say me that Avast and Kaspersky Lab are not so good (...like Emsisoft)? Emsisoft needs finally a feature that is standing out. It could be that Emsisoft uses better technologies but the customer isn't interrested for it if a second company has nearly the same feature.

 

[Andy Ful]

Emsisoft can compete as a very good security suite, but stays back a little when it comes to price (in some countries).

 

[509322]

Yeah, but the BB should in my opinion display what suspicious thing the application is trying to do. Adding itself to start-up itself is not dangerous itself, but combined with malicious code it is. That's what I meant with my post basically

/steel9

Creating an auto-run entry itself is suspicious. The BB detects and alerts to various auto-run creations. The user is expected to pay attention to what is happening on the system within the context of what the user is doing - and figure out whether it is potentially malicious or safe.

An auto-run alert out of nowhere is a red flag. It's common sense. An auto-run alert while installing a program that is widely accepted as safe and is known to run at system startup is not suspicious. It's common sense.

Asking for malicious code to be displayed in alerts is ridiculous. I am not being abrasive, but you don't know what you're asking for.