App Review ESET Review 2024: Tested in depth vs Malware (TPSC)

[czesetfan]

I don't know if that's an excuse if that's the way the product works.

I'm curious to see what this year's version 18.x, where a significant change to HIPS is announced, will bring.

 

[Minimalist]

I don't know if that's an excuse if that's the way the product works.

I agree with that. I don't see a need to make any excuses. Their product did well when tested with out-of-a-box configuration, so why would they have to make excuses when tester turned off products protection before making additional test?

 

[kailyn]

 

[Trident]

Same excuse as Webroot uses stating that it was not configured properly

Well whoever is buying these excuses is to blame, not the businesses pushing them.

 

[Trident]

I agree with that. I don't see a need to make any excuses. Their product did well when tested with out-of-a-box configuration, so why would they have to make excuses when tester turned off products protection before making additional test?

And how else is he supposed to test solely the behavioural blocker? His platform generates exe files that are low reputation and get deleted instantly.

 

[Shadowra]

Eset modules communicate with each other, so disabling an Eset module to test something else is suicide.
And obviously Leo still hasn't figured that out

 

[RoboMan]

Malx ruins my day

All in all, we bombarded ESET with 2,000+ malware files, disabled real-time protection, and tested HIPS in automatic mode (the weakest configuration of HIPS).

Anybody who thinks ESET is useless because of the result deserves to be a Leo's suscriber.

 

[oldschool]

All in all, we bombarded ESET with 2,000+ malware files, disabled real-time protection, and tested HIPS in automatic mode (the weakest configuration of HIPS).

configured correctly by a System administrator for a business environment (or a propeller head home user here on this forum)

Also give props to propeller heads around the world!

 

[CyberDevil]

So why Eset is allowing turning off individual components if this is the case? It is Eset’s responsibility to implement a proper poke-yoke to ensure that customers and users don’t enter erroneous states where components work half-way as expected.

For example, you have a lot of HIPS rules for system security configured manually or in learning mode, but you need to install something to bypass real-time protection without disabling the security of HIPS-protected resources. Being able to flexibly use components doesn't mean that components should be completely independent and autonomous, especially I don't support when a product decides for me how I want to do things, that's probably one of the things why I like Eset. Also casual user is unlikely to go disabling components for fun.

 

[lokamoka820]

ESET is an excellent antivirus, but it is expensive

 

[rashmi]

ESET is a product that relies mainly on signatures and lacks proper proactive security. ESET's proactive feature, called HIPS, is useless without an approved program list. On the other hand, Kaspersky and Bitdefender have complex but smart and effective proactive technologies that I find impressive. On the whole, ESET is just an average product, particularly when used in its recommended or default configuration.

 

[likeastar20]

I really like ESET. It would be my absolute favorite AV if it had the behavior blocker of Kaspersky or Bitdefender.

 

[Minimalist]

And how else is he supposed to test solely the behavioural blocker? His platform generates exe files that are low reputation and get deleted instantly.

He should contact vendor and ask them how their software should be configured to test that component only. If such configuration is not possible then performing that test is pointless.

 

[kailyn]

ESET has HIPS. The HIPS is extremely powerful in the right hands. The problem is to take advantage of that powerful HIPS the user needs to have commensurate skills, knowledge and - the most important - attitude. If you are that class of person then you chuckle when you see these kinds of threads.

 

[Trident]

ESET has HIPS. The HIPS is extremely powerful in the right hands. The problem is to take advantage of that powerful HIPS the user needs to have commensurate skills, knowledge and - the most important - attitude. If you are that class of person then you chuckle when you see these kinds of threads.

Nobody cares about HIPS this day and age because there is very little evidence that other modules are failing and unable to do their job.
Automatically collecting malware and pushing machine-generated signatures has been working for Eset for the past 10 years + and will continue to work for the next 10 years as well.

The test here is intended for a special and more curious audience that wants to know how well the behavioural blocking is doing.
For the faint hearted and average Joes, there is AV-Test.org