App Review Emsisoft Internet Security BETA Prevention and Detection Test

[safe1st]

Thanks for watching
and hope you enjoyed the test

 

[Evjl's Rain]

great video review as always . I expected a clean sheet for emsisoft but it didnt
In your next video could you please test KIS 2017 default settings with the same samples so we can compare between these top-notch products? Thank you

 

[LabZero]

Thanks for the great review as usual

It is a beta so probably the new implementations have influenced the detection. I believe that the final version has to be reconsidered.

 

[King Alpha]

Great vid, as always. @safe1st

 

[Solarquest]

Great video, thank you @safe1st for sharing!
I still think Emsisoft checks the cloud only if suspect activity is detected and not every time an unknown file is executed.
I hope they change this.
Btw, on Malware Hub I started testing Emsi IS beta too and will keep testing it for 30 days or till final version is released.

 

[FrFc1908]

Thanks for yet another great review , as allways very much apreciated! keep up the great work bro!!!!

 

[_CyberGhosT_]

Thank You Safe1st, very well done Vid.
The results don't bother me, EIS 11 scored better, so something is a little off,
the EmsiSoft team will figure it out and have it back on track in no time.

 

[frogboy]

Another nice test well done @safe1st .

 

[spaceoctopus]

Really nice the way the notifications work. Thnx for this video @safe1st

 

[Der.Reisende]

A great production as always @safe1st, worth to be shared on Emsisoft's FB page, too
Wonder why the PUP/PUA hasn't been stopped, the few PUP/PUA I came from were stopped by EIS 11 without any problem.
Really looking forward to 12 final!

 

[safe1st]

Thanks guys and yes hopefully they do something for final version

great video review as always . I expected a clean sheet for emsisoft but it didnt
In your next video could you please test KIS 2017 default settings with the same samples so we can compare between these top-notch products? Thank you

Cant be same sample. Why?
Because I test this Yesterday. And Im sure Kaspersky can detect more sample because newer signature

 

[tonibalas]

Since it is in beta i see why it didn't performed as expected.
But i am sure when the final version comes out protection will be at the normal high standards of EIS
Thanks for the review @safe1st

 

[Rebsat]

A user asked the following question on Emsisoft forum regarding safe1st video and Fabian Wosar, Emsisoft Development Team has answered

Hello Emsi Team,

here is a very new Video, that tested from a well known and good tester the new V12 Beta. In the Result of this video u can see, that Emsisoft has not detected a Ransom.
Now i would love to ask how that can be? Cause specially your new BB is trained to detect all forms of ransom ware. Maybe i would be good if u get into kontakt to the hoster and let you get the sample and test it yourself.
has u an answer why the ransom is not detected?

Thanks in advance. Chris

Just because some product calls it ransomware doesn't mean it has to be. There are dozens of reasons why this could have happened. The most likely one, given the fact that none of the files were even encrypted, is that the ransomware's C2 servers simply have been taken down already. So the file would never actually encrypt anything, which is kind of what we are looking for. There are also several ransomware families out there that simply will not attempt to encrypt any files if the system is running EAM. Cerber being one of those families for example.

 

[safe1st]

Thank you for let me know about that, appreciated it @Rebsat

 

[Rebsat]

@safe1st You are welcome bro. It's always a good feeling to see you here on MT testing and analyzing security product for us
We're so proud of you Man. Just keep up the good work

 

[shmu26]

great video review as always . I expected a clean sheet for emsisoft but it didnt
In your next video could you please test KIS 2017 default settings with the same samples so we can compare between these top-notch products? Thank you

using same samples again is not a fair test, because the first AV had to deal with zero-day samples, so the second AV will have the advantage.