Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Der.Reisende" data-source="post: 744881" data-attributes="member: 32430">I do not choose the option to receive a feedback unless I report a single sample (in order to tell them that the sample did bypass DeepGuard).Most of the time, they are decently fast to analyze and reply (a day or more). At least you get a reply.Not sure whether they set up global rules (now), when I tested FS in the past, DeepGuard did miss the same ransomware family multiple times, and was reported each time (I think it was #Shade, would need to search the archive). They told me that they found the file to be malicious and will roll out a detection with next update.However, when I lately reported Emotet Banking Trojan - twice), it took more than a week for a reply, finally telling me that the sample is (obviously now) by Bitdefender signatures.So mixed feelings.They&#039;re most likely not the fastest to add signatures, they rely on Bitdefender a lot I think.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Der.Reisende, post: 744881, member: 32430"] I do not choose the option to receive a feedback unless I report a single sample (in order to tell them that the sample did bypass DeepGuard). Most of the time, they are decently fast to analyze and reply (a day or more). At least you get a reply. Not sure whether they set up global rules (now), when I tested FS in the past, DeepGuard did miss the same ransomware family multiple times, and was reported each time (I think it was #Shade, would need to search the archive). They told me that they found the file to be malicious and will roll out a detection with next update. However, when I lately reported Emotet Banking Trojan - twice), it took more than a week for a reply, finally telling me that the sample is (obviously now) by Bitdefender signatures. So mixed feelings. They're most likely not the fastest to add signatures, they rely on Bitdefender a lot I think. [/QUOTE]

Verification