Serious Discussion FinalAV - British Startup Offering Containment for Unsigned Processes

Other security for Windows, Mac, Linux
40 Replies 5,267 Views
Trident

Trident

From Hawk Eye
Verified
Top Poster
Developer
Well-known
Whilst browsing the web, I came across this AV, which claims to be offering a rather "novel" approach.

A Novel Approach To Cybersecurity - Anti Virus | FinalAV Security

Anti virus software that protects you from yesterday’s malware is not good enough anymore. FinalAV turns the table with our patented security engine.
finalavsecurity.com finalavsecurity.com

The approach is to check whether executables have a digital signature and sandbox the ones without.



The website does have some issues:
  • It's got a slight hint of unprofessionalism, allows user to click on every image to zoom.
  • The website claims that attackers will not sign their creations, unless they want to get arrested by authorities. This is anecdotal at best, as there is loads of signed malware.
  • The above suggests that protection will be rendered useless simply by using a digital signature.
  • Video rather unprofessional too, sort of acceptable for a startup.
  • Resources, such as articles and support very limited.
Other than that, the application is not very expensive, I've not tried it myself. Trial is available on the website.
 
It seems like you've done quite a thorough analysis of FinalAV. While their approach of sandboxing unsigned executables is indeed novel, it's not a foolproof method as you've pointed out. Signed malware is a reality. The unprofessionalism and limited resources could be due to their startup status. However, if the price is reasonable and they offer a trial, it might be worth a shot but with caution. Remember to always have a backup of your important data.
 
Most dangerous malware are signed this wouldn't work and criminals sell certificates pretty cheap there are all kinds of reputation based security wich would deal better with malware pretty sure most major av vendors have an option to either block or isolate (best if it's cloud based isolation) based on reputation and they have enough customers to reduce false positives quote a lot so wouldn't really be much worse in terms of false positives
 
Last edited:
I took a look at their minifilter and what little it does is underwhelming to say the least.
I wouldn't even call this an AV, nor do I see the purpose of this product when (as others have said) other products implement similar features already, while implementing vastly more robust antimalware capabilities.
 
WTF ?

Capture d’écran 2025-01-28 171551.png Capture d’écran 2025-01-28 171529.png

Capture_decran_2024-11-28_132438.png
 
[correlate] said:
I've tried it and it doesn't work very well
It's been running the file categorization scan for hours.
And when I deleted it, it gave me a computer crash.
I'm no longer able to install new programs.
Click to expand...
Well it's contained right? If you can't use the PC you can't infect the PC, problem solved. Modern problems require modern solutions.
 
Hello all, I'm one of the co-founders of this British start-up and a colleague just recently flagged this thread to me. I hope you don't mind me following up, even if it is with quite a delay. Apologies for that 🙏

Your comments and complaints on the earlier releases of the product are well deserved and not dissimilar to what we received from early customers who shared their feedback directly with us. We had quite a rollercoaster of a launch to say the least!! We took the initial feedback and went back to some heavy redesign of our core engine, paused sales for a while, re-launched, got a bit more feedback, fixed things again, and here we are once more.

As the original poster of this thread had reckoned, we have indeed limited resources. My co-founder and I have bootstrapped this business all along (plus some modest angel investment), so we do not operate with a big budget. Honestly, it's proven a bit more difficult than we expected when we started, because with an anti-virus product you cannot really do the typical MVP with just a bit of functionality to test the concept, get some early customers and a first round of funding... a kernel device driver has to fully work. Gee, you won't even get it digitally signed in the Microsoft Hardware Partner Programme if it is not fully functional.

The product (and its installer!) is a lot more stable now, so if you feel like giving it another try, I'd be very keen to hear what you think. I'm sure you'll be as candid and delicate as before 😬
 
Josep_FinalAVSecurity said:
Hello all, I'm one of the co-founders of this British start-up and a colleague just recently flagged this thread to me. I hope you don't mind me following up, even if it is with quite a delay. Apologies for that 🙏

Your comments and complaints on the earlier releases of the product are well deserved and not dissimilar to what we received from early customers who shared their feedback directly with us. We had quite a rollercoaster of a launch to say the least!! We took the initial feedback and went back to some heavy redesign of our core engine, paused sales for a while, re-launched, got a bit more feedback, fixed things again, and here we are once more.

As the original poster of this thread had reckoned, we have indeed limited resources. My co-founder and I have bootstrapped this business all along (plus some modest angel investment), so we do not operate with a big budget. Honestly, it's proven a bit more difficult than we expected when we started, because with an anti-virus product you cannot really do the typical MVP with just a bit of functionality to test the concept, get some early customers and a first round of funding... a kernel device driver has to fully work. Gee, you won't even get it digitally signed in the Microsoft Hardware Partner Programme if it is not fully functional.

The product (and its installer!) is a lot more stable now, so if you feel like giving it another try, I'd be very keen to hear what you think. I'm sure you'll be as candid and delicate as before 😬
Click to expand...

The trial version still costs money...
So you have to pay to try it out? O_o
 
Shadowra said:
The trial version still costs money...
So you have to pay to try it out? O_o
Click to expand...
In fact, they only charge you after 30 days. If you start the trial today, you’ll only be charged on May 18, as you can see in the screenshot.
They ask for your payment details, I think in the hope that you forget, and thus keep paying. :P but they only charge you after 30 days.

Untitled.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Popolitus said:
In fact, they only charge you after 30 days. If you start the trial today, you’ll only be charged on May 18, as you can see in the screenshot.
They ask for your payment details, I think in the hope that you forget, and thus keep paying. :P but they only charge you after 30 days.
View attachment 297218
Click to expand...
You can start the trial without providing the bank card details if you prefer.
If you do provide them, we will start charging after 30 days unless you cancel.
If you don't provide them, after the 30 days you will receive an email reminder that your trial is coming to an end.

You don't feel that is fair? We thought that was pretty common practice in software trials.
By the way, most of our trial users go ahead without providing bank card details... doesn't seem to be an issue.
 
@Josep_FinalAVSecurity
That was actually me being candid.
Compared to my other posts and sometimes detailed reviews.

I know what you’re dealing with.

It works best when you are really passionate about it, and ideas how you can solve massive problems just hit you.

But clicking on images on the website still allows zooming (gallery sort of way). You need to address that with Authenticstyle.

I’m a dev myself and working on innovative NGFW. I don’t even have co-founder or angel investments. Just support from Google 🙂

One of the APIs I use costs 52K a year.

This thread is from before I start my projects.
 
Josep_FinalAVSecurity said:
You can start the trial without providing the bank card details if you prefer.
If you do provide them, we will start charging after 30 days unless you cancel.
If you don't provide them, after the 30 days you will receive an email reminder that your trial is coming to an end.

You don't feel that is fair? We thought that was pretty common practice in software trials.
By the way, most of our trial users go ahead without providing bank card details... doesn't seem to be an issue.
Click to expand...
Nowadays, it's rare for trials to ask for credit card details, or even to create an account. I don't know where they got that information from...(check your pairs),first they say no credit card data is needed, but then on the page, they ask for a mountain of data, and it's not clear that card details are optional. Too confusing and laborious for a simple trial.
 
Popolitus said:
Nowadays, it's rare for trials to ask for credit card details, or even to create an account. I don't know where they got that information from...(check your pairs),first they say no credit card data is needed, but then on the page, they ask for a mountain of data, and it's not clear that card details are optional. Too confusing and laborious for a simple trial.
Click to expand...
It’s not really rare for anything nowadays.
 

Recently browsing

Members who viewed this thread in the last 5 minutes

You may also like...

Back
Top