Well not one av is perfect, at least eset is very light and still has good detection ,pairing it with voodooshield or crystal security.At least we can actually use the computer and not wait for things to load like some av's ,bitdefender and many others are great but wow sooooooooooooo heavy that using the computer makes you want to just leave it there.
ESET Internet Security 2019 Review
- Thread starter razorfancy
- Start date
It is advised to take all reviews with a grain of salt. In extreme cases some reviews use dramatization for entertainment purposes.
- Aug 4, 2016
- 1,465
I'm not having a go at ESET I've used it since NOD32 first appeared & still do but shouldn't AV companies have to at least explain what went wrong as in this test & others, I don't think anyone has said 'OMG It's a piece of crap' either as it isn't.
Though if we can't have a discussion without those posting to be accused of emotionalism. I had a mail from Emsisoft today explaining the latest changes, mainly changes to the GUI & the ability to use an email rather than serial code. This is from a company that hasn't done well lately & uses lots of resources, in the tests I saw. An AV can perform just as it wants & no comeback. Shouldn't ESET at least explain why it failed at a ransom-ware attack (as should they all) - Glad they don't make cars.
I drive a KIA
Though if we can't have a discussion without those posting to be accused of emotionalism. I had a mail from Emsisoft today explaining the latest changes, mainly changes to the GUI & the ability to use an email rather than serial code. This is from a company that hasn't done well lately & uses lots of resources, in the tests I saw. An AV can perform just as it wants & no comeback. Shouldn't ESET at least explain why it failed at a ransom-ware attack (as should they all) - Glad they don't make cars.
I drive a KIA Attachments
Shouldn't ESET at least explain why it failed at a ransom-ware attack (as should they all) - Glad they don't make cars.
Not really. Most publishers really don't care what security soft geeks and enthusiasts think. There are people who have brought stuff to me. I look at it carefully. And except for 1 or 2 cases I've just blown the reports off because the issue wasn't really an issue. In the mind of the reporter it was a big deal, but in reality it was nothing to fret about.
When people get all bent out of shape over a soft, then that is entirely irrational behavior. The reactions to this ESET test are way disproportionate to the actual issue - from both sides. Those that are upset that ESET failed and those who are doing their best to discredit the test. The emotions are very obviously running quite high.
ESET signature detection failed in a single instance. So what ? If a user downloads unknown files, opens those files on their system, and gets infected, guess whose fault that is ? It certainly isn't the AV publisher... because in their EULA it puts all responsibility onto the user.
Security software do not guarantee perfect protection. That's certainly true of default allow. Had the HIPS been used, ESET would have alerted the user and it's the responsibility of the user to know what to do.
People would do themselves a big favor by educating themselves instead of being entirely dependent upon (enslaved) to default allow security softs.
I know what Leo's opinion is... that the soft needs to do everything on behalf of the user. Wanting security softs that get it right 100 % of the time without user involvement is an unrealistic expectation. That's false hope. Technologically it is an impossibility. Go sell that crap somewhere else. However, the sad part is people keep buying into and believing the crap. And some don't understand how or why they got infected.
- Jun 24, 2016
- 2,400
Remember when we all mentioned that the best protection against ransomware is backup? This is why. Not even "secure folders" are invulnerable to bypassing. Every AV has its problems and flaws, and most of the times they will protect again ransomware, but sometimes when we face zero-day ransomware this happens. And probably some other software did block it. And probably in the near future this same software will fail against other type of the attack. That's how it works. No dev can know which vulnerability will be exploited within the next malware, and since no module is perfect, they all will fail sooner or later. The most important thing is to stick with one product you like, tweak it and pair it with compatible efficient software, find your ideal combination, acquire safe habits, and you're good to go. If you're gonna uninstall antivirus software each time you see it fails on a test, then switch to ChromeOS LOL.
Problem is, Eset or any vendor for that matter can't explain to you why without analyzing the test samples and looking at everything all together, hence Marcos responses. Even @Lockdown gave an example for appguard, but that was only after they were able to assess the situation. If they aren't able to, they cannot provide an answer. In this case Leo didn't send anything to Eset, so they may not be able to ever fully explain it.
Also if you read this thread carefully, you will see that people are essentially saying eset is crap because you have comments like"i won't recommend eset", it won't protect you from attacksc, etc...., all of this because it failed one test and didn't get 100%
The problem is that people do infact put emotion into these discussions. As I've said, everytime there's a test, people play musical chairs with software. Also, you get opinions and misinformation regarding products and how they work and are constantly stated as fact, when they are not. Some people say they failed because it doesn't have a BB, but even if it did, would it really make difference? People assume that if a product has a certain feature some how it will make this even better, when infact it may not.
Again use what you like and don't stress over these tests
In my experience, if a video shows this or that and it creates dramas, it is best to just ignore it. Not participating in the dramas is the best thing. Like I said, people have brought various things forward. Most of the time it there is nothing to fix. For the things that need fixed I supply the simple reply of "fixed" without any additional details. No publisher is obligated to provide an explanation. And I don't know why anyone would want to because explaining things never satisfies most people anyway.
- Apr 1, 2017
- 1,760
There is no 100% protection against RW and IDC if my AV (Eset, Panda, 360, F-secure, Dr.web or whatever it is)fail against ransomware because it doesn't matter(other layers and Brain.DLL should fill that hole).
All AVs get bypass by RW! Eset can protect your network(has ids) while many others Avs don't even have a good firewall(F-secure, Emsisoft, TrendMicro and more...)
Eset has decent parental control and if u enable it the site that hosts malware(RW) will never open(blocked by Zvelo or it is unknown and Zvelo says bro u cant go there we don't know what this site is).
if you learn how to use Eset you will be protected but need brian.dll! people who don't know how to use Eset better to have their file encrypted(not Eset fault ).
Better to test ESET against exploits or some network attacks and COMPARE ITS RESULTS WITH OTHER AVS! since testers are Noob (like myself) they can't do such tests and we can't see the real power of suites like Eset.
((RW is not the only threat)).
All AVs get bypass by RW! Eset can protect your network(has ids) while many others Avs don't even have a good firewall(F-secure, Emsisoft, TrendMicro and more...)
Eset has decent parental control and if u enable it the site that hosts malware(RW) will never open(blocked by Zvelo or it is unknown and Zvelo says bro u cant go there we don't know what this site is).
if you learn how to use Eset you will be protected but need brian.dll! people who don't know how to use Eset better to have their file encrypted(not Eset fault ).
Better to test ESET against exploits or some network attacks and COMPARE ITS RESULTS WITH OTHER AVS! since testers are Noob (like myself) they can't do such tests and we can't see the real power of suites like Eset.
((RW is not the only threat)).
Pigeon party still going hard, dem feathers flying left and right..
- Apr 1, 2017
- 1,760
They don't have to answer to you or your Mom.This is from a company that hasn't done well lately & uses lots of resources, in the tests I saw. An AV can perform just as it wants & no comeback. Shouldn't ESET at least explain why it failed at a ransom-ware attack (as should they all) - Glad they don't make cars.
According to the Eset website, Honda Motor is one of Eset's customers! how can they trust Eset to protect their machines but a noobie braindead home user(who don't even know Eset has a parental control)cant?!
Just admit people you can't use Interactive or policy-based mode, and you blame eset for that? You don't read any software manuals or documentation, but want an AV suite which will do everything for you out of the box. Anyone who ditched eset from their systems after watching this review is clear id1ot, I'm sorry. Swallow it.
- May 3, 2015
- 1,535
One of the main problems of Eset is that it relies on HIPS for extra protection and HIPS is too complicated for the average user. Take a look at this site, for instance... Configure HIPS rules for ESET business products to protect against ransomware
If you follow those instructions it basically becomes a default deny solution for most script based attacks. But they are absolutely not newbie friendly instructions
If you follow those instructions it basically becomes a default deny solution for most script based attacks. But they are absolutely not newbie friendly instructions
Last edited:
- Apr 2, 2018
- 1,721
interactive or policy based mode is good for experts, but for noobies they will just let the malicious apps run anyway.
- Mar 29, 2018
- 7,111
+1 on that. Noobs won't even know to look for the instructions, let alone follow them. But this isn't ESET's fault. So the question becomes: should all AVs' default settings include maximum protection? I hesitate to stir the pot but isn't this the complaint that some AV critics, e.g. Windows Defender critics, use when talking about its weak default settings? BTW, I never used ESET since I like free most of the time!
- Aug 4, 2016
- 1,465
This thread is ending up as many do, I sometimes think when you are speaking to another person on a forum, behave as you would if the person is in a real not virtual room with you. Condescending & patronising language has no place on a forum or in real life which this actually is. I do wonder if some who are Level 200 speak to their friends, work colleagues & family as they do on forums. It is a minority & frankly people can say what they want to me I don't know ones on here & likely never will, but try & keep it decent? We have been talking about anti-virus products, & we shouldn't be personal even if at time we feel annoyed. That's my £'s worth
Another same'ol same'ol thread about a youtest and a vendor rep whinning about it...
When i see a rep whinning (and even accusing a colleague of trichery) , I believe there is some truth in the test.
You know the term "Truth hurts"...
Itwt
When i see a rep whinning (and even accusing a colleague of trichery) , I believe there is some truth in the test.
You know the term "Truth hurts"...
Itwt
- Apr 2, 2018
- 1,721
For those that do use ESET and don't want to add all those HIPS rules for ransomware manually but would like them.
Click
I did this over default security settings, anything else you'll have to tweak yourself.
Click
I did this over default security settings, anything else you'll have to tweak yourself.
And continuous behavior with over-sensitive baby reaction when one can't admit he's own mistakes or accept the things for what they are, have place on a forum? People already report posts for being offended when their favourite antivirus didn't perform as they expected and someone who replied put it in a trashcan as well. People take things personally, when there is no same agreement and when everybody express their own opinion, some twelve year old mentally blows up and start whining to staff that thread didn't go the way he was planning, it was hyjacked or whatever, when in fact none of it was done and people should just take more often look in the mirror rather than blaming others.
Eset took an L this time, so what? Move on! If one can't move, learn the HIPS functionality in it. Don't want to learn? It's not others fault and more importantly, has nothing to do with eset.
Last edited by a moderator:
ESET claim they are 'install and forget' solution even when it comes to most advanced threats. So when average PC user looking for AV and read that, then should expect better protection on default settings. Sure advanced users know they have to tweak settings, but most people have no idea about that and they get infected and lose files, because ESET claim they will protect you with default settings.
Similar threads
