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
F‑Secure SAFE vs Gerber 3.0 ransomware (Juan Diaz)
Message
<blockquote data-quote="509322" data-source="post: 782298"><p>F-Secure is default-allow. Do people not realize that default-allow is intrinsically behind the protection curve ? I always wonder why people get so perturbed when a default-allow solutions fails to protect a system. Do people think that security soft developers just sit there waiting for the next malware report to come rolling in so they can hurry-up and implement a protection solution ? It don't work that way.</p><p></p><p>The malc0ders are always going to find new ways to outwit default-allow. You just have to find a trusted process and abuse it. And it takes a good bit of time for counter-measures to be introduced by the default-allow publishers. This is as it has always been.</p><p></p><p>Now this doesn't mean that default-allow is a worthless protection model. It just means what it means, at face value... and that default-allow is almost always behind in the malc0der vs security soft industry cat-and-mouse game.</p><p></p><p>People should not be surprised when they see a "bypass" video. It's nothing to get all bent out of shape over.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="509322, post: 782298"] F-Secure is default-allow. Do people not realize that default-allow is intrinsically behind the protection curve ? I always wonder why people get so perturbed when a default-allow solutions fails to protect a system. Do people think that security soft developers just sit there waiting for the next malware report to come rolling in so they can hurry-up and implement a protection solution ? It don't work that way. The malc0ders are always going to find new ways to outwit default-allow. You just have to find a trusted process and abuse it. And it takes a good bit of time for counter-measures to be introduced by the default-allow publishers. This is as it has always been. Now this doesn't mean that default-allow is a worthless protection model. It just means what it means, at face value... and that default-allow is almost always behind in the malc0der vs security soft industry cat-and-mouse game. People should not be surprised when they see a "bypass" video. It's nothing to get all bent out of shape over. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top