Expired Free one year subscription to VoodooShield!

[VoodooShield]

The reason the other AE's went out of business is because they did not have our patent pending desktop shield gadget / customized whitelist snapshot / application shielding (toggling in smart mode) features that creates an AE that everyone can use, even a novice. It allows VS to offer deny by default as opposed to the extremely dangerous affirmative prompt that UAC uses. It is very simple... if VS blocks something out of the blue then ignore it. If it blocks something you are trying to run, then click on VS (or the balloon) and allow it, and scan with VirusTotal if necessary.

You have to understand they are different levels of novice users, when I was teaching computer education courses, about 95% of my students didn't even know how to use the left click functions on the mouse, use taskbar icons, use Windows default components, some didn't even know how to turn off their computers they would just push the power button.

You can't tell me that they would understand how to use a product like VoodooShield. To effectively use just about any type of software requires at least intermediate computer knowledge. As cutting_edgetech explained in detail how to use VoodooShield, most novice users would already be lost on the first sentence. You would have to stand beside them and teach them with examples. Still even after that some may still not understand it completely.

Sometimes it is hard for more advanced users to understand how novice users think. When I was teaching my computer learning courses, I found it was much easier to teach my students how to download safely and avoid fake alert sites then it was to teach them how to use security software effectively. Some would even learn how to use UAC much easier then trying to figure out how to use security software. Education is the key to protecting systems, no software will compare. A lot of my students never learned all about the basic common functions performed on Windows but many did learn to most important security habits which did keep them malware free. You might be surprised how many public schools don't offer computer education courses. A lot of students never get the chance to learn until they attend college unless they take private lessons.

A lot of the more advanced users can say as well your habits are far more important then the security software that you use. Learn how to control your habits then all you will need is a basic AV, if that.

Thanks.

I COMPLETELY understand and appreciate what you are saying. Remember, I am a computer consultant too, and while I really like my clients a lot, most of them are very basic computer users. THAT WAS WHY VS WAS CREATED!!!!!! I just tell them to just let VS block everything, unless it keeps blocking something that they are intending to run. It took me 13 years to finally figure out a method that was compatible with the user habits of even the most basic users. I just happen to like it for its simplicity, it has blocked 3 drive by viruses for me.

Honestly, if you can think of a better method that basic computer users would understand better than VS, you should consider developing it, because there is always a better mousetrap!

There was something very funny that happened today. Most of my clients run VS now. I try not to push VS too hard on them, but I certainly let them know about it. This client of mine with 13 computers called today, and two were nailed with viruses this morning. They have always talked about installing VS, but they always have said that they are too busy to bother installing it, and I was not going to beg them to install our software. After all, I have lost close to half of my business because of VS. They are all still clients, but there are only so many printers I need to install . Anyway, to make a long story short, as I was removing the virus, I had to install CleanUP! to remove the temp files so that the malwarebytes scan would not take so long. I double clicked on the CleanUP! installer, and guess what popped up? Your best friend... drum roll please... UAC! So it blocked CleanUP!, but did not stop the virus. Anyway, I thought of you and a guy on wilders who give me a lot of trouble about VS and UAC. And I actually took a picture with my phone so I could post it or email it to you!!! You should be able to check the date and location to verify my story! Anyway, they bought 13 licenses of VS and should be good to go.

Speaking of that, I agree, I highly doubt we retain over 50% of the free users after a year, but that is just the way it goes. It will be interesting to see what percentage we retain since a lot of people use the word "love" when describing VS. When was the last time you ever heard someone say that the love their security software? I know how much you like UAC, but you have never told me that you love it!

It is really cool though, we are getting a few orders from people who previously signed up for a free account, donations basically. We would put a donate button on the site, but that is a little tacky.

The goal is to somehow make VS free to everyone, and there are several ways we can go about that, and we have 1 year to do it before everyone's free subscription runs out!

Keep in mind, I try to keep my conversations as friendly and funny as possible, and I like to joke around a lot, so please do not take offense. After all, it is us against the bad guys, right?

 

[cutting_edgetech]

That was what I was thinking when I was reading littlebits post. Overkill, we must think alike.

Well, I chose to quote Overkill, but it did not quote him or her. Guess, it must be a bug with forum.

 

[cutting_edgetech]

I would like to share my story with everyone about my experience with VS. Everything I say is completely truthful, and I have no reason to say anything good or bad about VS other than what I have personally experienced. When I first heard about VS I had ran the same security setup for the last 8 years. My layered security setup was more than enough in my opinion so I didn't think there was any reason to try VS. VS had been out for about a year, and a few members at Wilders was bragging about how great it was. I thought to myself that was nothing new because you always have members in security forums that are constantly switching security products, and always think the grass is greener on the other side. So I took it with a grain of salt. I was curious about VS though so I finally decided to try VS not really knowing what to expect since at that time I had only read several post in the VS thread. I didn't even know if it was a BB, AE, HIPS or maybe even a combination. I was a little hesitant to try it because I thought the name VS was a strange name for a security product. It's name definitely did not give me any indication of what type of security product it was, and I thought it might be a waste of time. So, I finally decided to give it a try. After the installation was complete I let it cycle through it's training mode. Then I placed it back in training mode, and rebooted a couple times just to be safe. Not that it was required. I always have my own way of doing things. After that I did everything I normally use my computer for. I got a couple of alerts from application I had installed in the userspace. I went ahead, and placed VS in training mode while I ran the 2 applications I had installed in the userspace. (For informational purposes: Most application do not install to the userspace, but if there are any installed there then they need to be ran while VS is in training mode. VS will automatically allow applications in the Program Files directory by default). Then I placed VS in always on mode to enable VS's protection. I then ran every single application I had installed while VS's protection was enabled. I never heard a peep out of VS. To the best of my knowledge after that I never had to answer to anything else from VS again. I had it block a few things from time to time that was attempting to run in my browser, but VS did not require me to answer to any prompt. VS's tray icon in the toolbar flashed to let me know it blocked something, but it blocked it without requiring any action from me. A couple of occasion it appeared to have blocked malicious code in my browser, and it did not require me to respond to any prompt. I never verified it, but I was glad VS did not allow it to run.

Some members have compared VS to UAC, and have gave the impression you have to answer prompts like you do with UAC. That is not true at all. If VS blocks anything it's tray icon will blink. If the user wants to see what VS has blocked then the user can click on the tray icon to see what has been blocked. If the user decides they want to allow the executable that has been blocked then VS will give an option to allow the executable. The user does not have to respond to anything being blocked since VS will block any new executable or threat by default without any need for the user to respond to any prompt. UAC on the other hand does require the user to respond to prompts. In many cases the user will be prompted by UAC to allow or deny applications already installed that the user has deemed to be safe. For instance years ago when I had UAC enabled it would always prompt me to allow or deny Ccleaner each time I ran it. After VS has been trained properly it will not prompt you to allow or deny any application you already have installed on your machine.

I also read comparisons of VS, and UAC in terms of the level of protection offered. I have to say I was surprised to see someone claim that UAC offers the same level of protection as VS. I'm only paraphrasing of course. VS offers far greater protection than UAC! I'm not saying UAC has no value, but there are a large number of threats that will just bypass UAC these days. If you set UAC to it's max settings then it will stop more threats, but it will also require much more user input. I believe many people would find UAC quite annoying at max settings! In my honest opinion UAC would only stop maybe 35-40 percent of the threats on the net on any given day at max settings, and i am being very generous with those statistics. I believe VS on the other hand would stop 96 to 100 percent of all threats on the net on any given day. I have no way to prove either of course, but is my honest opinion. I do not know of VS being bypassed yet. VoodooShield is adding memory protection very soon so it would be hard to imagine anything getting by it then. Nothing is fool proof though even though VS appears to be so far. I'm realistic so I can't say there's no possibility of it being bypassed. Malware writers are more creative than ever, and it would be foolish to make such a statement.

Last, but not least. VoodooShield is very light on resources in terms of CPU, read / write disk access, and considerably lighter on memory than many other security applications. I have not noticed any impact on system performance. If you do experience high CPU usage, or high memory usage then please let the developers know. It would be most likely due to a conflict with another application running on your setup. I have been using VS now for a little over a year, and I have seen a few isolate incidents of this over that period. I think I've only seen this with 2 cases which were fixed almost immediately.

Well, iv'e been using VS for a little over a year, and i'm very pleased with it. Like I said I have no reason to say anything good or bad about VS. This has been my experience with using it for a little over a year now. I don't expect everyone will like it. There's no one solution for everyone. All I ask is you try it for yourself, and don't let others opinions be the deciding factor for you. Not even mine for that matter.

Regards,
Mike

 

[Littlebits]

Anytime a new paid security product comes out, you will find a lot of fake reports and reviews. They will get posted on most download sites, security forums and blogs, etc. Some will fake details to make to product look better while others will fake details to make the product look worse.

The only way that you will know if a product will work for you is to try it for yourself and give an honest attempt to learn how it works.

Most paid products will only give you like a 30 day trial or less which isn't enough to test it properly.

VoodooShiled is giving you a complete year to try it for free.

So don't let negative reviews discourage you to try it.

All products have both positive and negative aspects, but it is up to the user to decide if the product will work for them and if it is worth the price.

No product is 100% perfect, when you read reviews that don't list anything bad about the product or reviews that don't list anything good about the product they are most likely fake reviews. Negative feedback is what helps developers improve their products, if they choose to listen.

No product is 100% novice user proof, believe me, they can install malware on just about any system no matter which security products they use. Sometimes when they want an executable to run to play their fake porn video for example, they will just disable all of their security products to allow it. I have had customers tell me, why does this product keep blocking my video downloads, I had to turn it off to allow it to play.

I have even had customers that would uninstall security products because it was blocking malware that they thought it was something else they wanted to run.

The only option that has worked to keep these kind of customers safe is Limited User Accounts since they don't seem to want to learn.

The majority of the users that I attended college with were just as bad, the college only had a few Administrators, most of the users ran on Limited User Accounts. And as far as I know that is the way most businesses operate in the US.

Because I will have to stand by my statement: All security software has to require at least intermediate computer skills to use it effectively.

Of coarse novice users can learn if they want to learn but most don't have any desire to learn at all. They don't care how many infections they may have running on their system as long as it doesn't try to block something they want to do.

Thanks.

 

[VoodooShield]

Anytime a new paid security product comes out, you will find a lot of fake reports and reviews. They will get posted on most download sites, security forums and blogs, etc. Some will fake details to make to product look better while others will fake details to make the product look worse.

The only way that you will know if a product will work for you is to try it for yourself and give an honest attempt to learn how it works.

Most paid products will only give you like a 30 day trial or less which isn't enough to test it properly.

VoodooShiled is giving you a complete year to try it for free.

So don't let negative reviews discourage you to try it.

All products have both positive and negative aspects, but it is up to the user to decide if the product will work for them and if it is worth the price.

No product is 100% perfect, when you read reviews that don't list anything bad about the product or reviews that don't list anything good about the product they are most likely fake reviews. Negative feedback is what helps developers improve their products, if they choose to listen.

No product is 100% novice user proof, believe me, they can install malware on just about any system no matter which security products they use. Sometimes when they want an executable to run to play their fake porn video for example, they will just disable all of their security products to allow it. I have had customers tell me, why does this product keep blocking my video downloads, I had to turn it off to allow it to play.

I have even had customers that would uninstall security products because it was blocking malware that they thought it was something else they wanted to run.

The only option that has worked to keep these kind of customers safe is Limited User Accounts since they don't seem to want to learn.

The majority of the users that I attended college with were just as bad, the college only had a few Administrators, most of the users ran on Limited User Accounts. And as far as I know that is the way most businesses operate in the US.

Because I will have to stand by my statement: All security software has to require at least intermediate computer skills to use it effectively.

Of coarse novice users can learn if they want to learn but most don't have any desire to learn at all. They don't care how many infections they may have running on their system as long as it doesn't try to block something they want to do.

Thanks.

So which is better for the absolute novice computer user, all the way up through an average computer user?

1. Presenting the user with a confusing affirmative prompts that looks like Greek to them, and where they are forced to make a decision right then

Or

2. Use the deny by default method that VS offers and tell the user to just ignore what VS is blocking, unless they really, really want to run it. And if they do decide to run it, they better scan it with virustotal first.

So, which do yo choose? And seriously, if there is a better way, then we need to do it.

Keep in mind, the virustotal scan will be more streamlined soon, once we implement the API. It is already written, we just have to get approval from VirusTotal.

I admit, others have failed to do what we are doing. But their technology was not absolute and it allowed exceptions. You are still not getting the point of VS. A computer should have a quality traditional blacklist antivirus and VS. VS is its first line of defense. If a web app is running, and If something comes in that is not on VS's tiny, customized VS whitelist, it is blocked. If the user allows it, then it is scanned by VT or the traditional blacklist scanner.

Think of it like NAT in networking. Every router has NAT, right? It is a very simple technology that just works. Same with VS... every device should have this technology. People twice as intelligent about computer security as you and I combined completely agree that if any technology has a shot at being truly bulletproof, it is VS. You will see soon.

I cannot claim that it is bulletproof yet, but nothing has slipped through it yet.

By the way, 90% of all PC desktops run admin accounts. I can find the link to the stat if you need it. I have posted it 3 times on other sites.

 

[cutting_edgetech]

I've seen the mention of VS type technology failing in the past for various reasons. In my opinion that's only partially true. Similar less user friendly products have been successful because the developers were able to customize them for Corporate, and Government use.

Faronics Anti-executable for example has a considerable portion of the Corporate Market. Here is a list of only a few of Faronics customers http://www.faronics.com/company/our-customers/ When I worked for the Fayette County Urban Government in Lexington, KY we used Faronics Anti-Executable on our WAN. We had a population of 472,099 in 2012. We had thousands of computers on our WAN.

BlueRidge Networks has a contract with United States Government. The Military uses Borderguard which uses the same technology as Appguard to protect it's secure remote access. Appguard was made possible due to the Corporate, and Government Market.

Faronics Anti-executable has been successful with their Enterprise version of Faronics Anti-executable in Government, and Corporate Markets. BlueRidge Networks has been successful with the Government Market. If I remember correctly they even received an award from the NSA in some category. I do not know much about their Enterprise customers. BRN may be doing just as well in the Corporate. I just don't know. I consider those products similar in nature. I believe VoodooShield is more user friendly for the consumer market. If Faronics, and BlueRidge Networks was able to be successful then VoodooShield Certainly can!

 

[Overkill]

Because I will have to stand by my statement: All security software has to require at least intermediate computer skills to use it effectively.

I agree, my family (especially my teenage daughter) laughs at my "security" and they just get annoyed with it, so yea you have to care and be interested atleast a littlebit (no pun lol) to stay malware free.

 

[Overkill]

So which is better for the absolute novice computer user, all the way up through an average computer user?

1. Presenting the user with a confusing affirmative prompts that looks like Greek to them, and where they are forced to make a decision right then

Or

2. Use the deny by default method that VS offers and tell the user to just ignore what VS is blocking, unless they really, really want to run it. And if they do decide to run it, they better scan it with virustotal first.

So, which do yo choose? And seriously, if there is a better way, then we need to do it.

Keep in mind, the virustotal scan will be more streamlined soon, once we implement the API. It is already written, we just have to get approval from VirusTotal.

I admit, others have failed to do what we are doing. But their technology was not absolute and it allowed exceptions. You are still not getting the point of VS. A computer should have a quality traditional blacklist antivirus and VS. VS is its first line of defense. If a web app is running, and If something comes in that is not on VS's tiny, customized VS whitelist, it is blocked. If the user allows it, then it is scanned by VT or the traditional blacklist scanner.

Think of it like NAT in networking. Every router has NAT, right? It is a very simple technology that just works. Same with VS... every device should have this technology. People twice as intelligent about computer security as you and I combined completely agree that if any technology has a shot at being truly bulletproof, it is VS. You will see soon.

I cannot claim that it is bulletproof yet, but nothing has slipped through it yet.

By the way, 90% of all PC desktops run admin accounts. I can find the link to the stat if you need it. I have posted it 3 times on other sites.

I totally think VS is better for a novice BUTTTTTTTT...I don't think a novice that couldn't care less will have the patience and care enough to train VS...so it would have to be a more knowledgeable person in the house to do that or technician recommend it to a user once they have to get there pc fixed from infections. I'm just speaking from my own experience.
Most of the people I know would install avg and expect to be malware free...no disrespect towards avg.

 

[VoodooShield]

I totally think VS is better for a novice BUTTTTTTTT...I don't think a novice that couldn't care less will have the patience and care enough to train VS...so it would have to be a more knowledgeable person in the house to do that or technician recommend it to a user once they have to get there pc fixed from infections. I'm just speaking from my own experience.
Most of the people I know would install avg and expect to be malware free...no disrespect towards avg.

Exactly... that is why we say "I have antivirus software, how did I get a virus?" VS is very, very easy to train, and the goal is to make it even easier. VS is a smart anti executable that everyone can use .

 

[VoodooShield]

And actually, if someone is that much of a novice, should they be installing software anyway? If that is the case, just train VS for 5 minutes, put it in Always ON mode, set a password in VS, and they are good to go!

 

[Littlebits]

And actually, if someone is that much of a novice, should they be installing software anyway?

Agree, but the majority of software installed to Windows is done by these novice users. They will do what they shouldn't do and they won't do what they should do. If they have a way to disable security products to do what they want to then they will. They want complete freedom to make their choices even though their choices causes them to get infections and most don't care until an infection blocks something they want to do.

So what novice users hate is anything that will block what they want to do whether it is good or bad. That is why most security software, UAC and Limited User Accounts just don't work well for them. They want full control to destroy their system and spread malware to others.

I have often joked about "All computer users should have to take a test to get a license before using the web". The ones that don't care and are not willing to learn get banned from the web. Problem solved.

I think what causes computer illiteracy is the lack of education. If all public schools had computer education courses starting with like 5th grade to 12th grade and made it a requirement to complete, there wouldn't be so many novice users. Instead public schools teach a lot of topics that are basically useless to their students and doesn't help with with their future careers. Many jobs are moving towards computers skills and those who don't have the skills just won't get better jobs.

Thanks.

 

[Morro]

When VS blocks something we get a balloon that we can click on, but to me it seems that it disappears way to fast. So far it happens quit often ( not always mind you. ) that when i see that balloon and want to click on it...it disappears the moment i have the cursor on it. Then i have to restart the program in order to get the balloon message again. ( I hat this happen just now when Thunderbird wanted to update. )

Is there a way to increase the time that those balloon messages stay visable?

 

[King Alpha]

Hi guys, I have a problem installing VoodooShield. I'm receiving this error (ShellExecuteEx failed; code 1816. Not enough quota is available to process this command) each time I run the installer. What should I do now?

 

[Littlebits]

Hi guys, I have a problem installing VoodooShield. I'm receiving this error (ShellExecuteEx failed; code 1816. Not enough quota is available to process this command) each time I run the installer. What should I do now?

Try disabling all other security products first then run the installer.

If that don't work then contact developer; https://voodooshield.com/support/

Thanks.

 

[VoodooShield]

And actually, if someone is that much of a novice, should they be installing software anyway?

Agree, but the majority of software installed to Windows is done by these novice users. They will do what they shouldn't do and they won't do what they should do. If they have a way to disable security products to do what they want to then they will. They want complete freedom to make their choices even though their choices causes them to get infections and most don't care until an infection blocks something they want to do.

So what novice users hate is anything that will block what they want to do whether it is good or bad. That is why most security software, UAC and Limited User Accounts just don't work well for them. They want full control to destroy their system and spread malware to others.

I have often joked about "All computer users should have to take a test to get a license before using the web". The ones that don't care and are not willing to learn get banned from the web. Problem solved.

I think what causes computer illiteracy is the lack of education. If all public schools had computer education courses starting with like 5th grade to 12th grade and made it a requirement to complete, there wouldn't be so many novice users. Instead public schools teach a lot of topics that are basically useless to their students and doesn't help with with their future careers. Many jobs are moving towards computers skills and those who don't have the skills just won't get better jobs.

Thanks.

I cannot say that I disagree with you .

 

[VoodooShield]

When VS blocks something we get a balloon that we can click on, but to me it seems that it disappears way to fast. So far it happens quit often ( not always mind you. ) that when i see that balloon and want to click on it...it disappears the moment i have the cursor on it. Then i have to restart the program in order to get the balloon message again. ( I hat this happen just now when Thunderbird wanted to update. )

Is there a way to increase the time that those balloon messages stay visable?

Hi, yes, I know exactly what you are talking about. We have tried to create an option that would allow the user to adjust the time that the balloon is displayed, but we have been unable to find a method that works. As odd as that sounds... you would think this could be adjusted. If you mouse over the balloon when you see it, it will not fade, so this helps some. But finding a method to allow the user to adjust the balloon display time is definitely on or to do list. Thank you!.

 

[VoodooShield]

Hi guys, I have a problem installing VoodooShield. I'm receiving this error (ShellExecuteEx failed; code 1816. Not enough quota is available to process this command) each time I run the installer. What should I do now?

Hi, we received an email this morning about this error, was this you? It was the first time we had ever seen this error. Did downloading the installer to your desktop first work, or was your security software blocking the installer? Or is it not working yet? .

VS works great with all of the top traditional av software once it is installed. But there is a chance that it might block the installer, even though it is digitally signed.

Anyway, if it is not working yet, please let us know! Thank you!

---

Hi guys, I have a problem installing VoodooShield. I'm receiving this error (ShellExecuteEx failed; code 1816. Not enough quota is available to process this command) each time I run the installer. What should I do now?

Try disabling all other security products first then run the installer.

If that don't work then contact developer; https://voodooshield.com/support/

Thanks.

Thank you!

 

[Morro]

Hi, yes, I know exactly what you are talking about. We have tried to create an option that would allow the user to adjust the time that the balloon is displayed, but we have been unable to find a method that works. As odd as that sounds... you would think this could be adjusted. If you mouse over the balloon when you see it, it will not fade, so this helps some. But finding a method to allow the user to adjust the balloon display time is definitely on or to do list. Thank you!.

That is good to hear, i will wait then, thank you VoodoShield.

 

[King Alpha]

VoodooShield,
I just figured out whats the culprit. It's Comodo. I accidentally unticked the "Detect programs which require elevated priveleges e.g. installers or updaters" in the behavior blocker section of the AV.

Thanks a lot guys for this awesome product, VoodooShield!

 

[VoodooShield]

VoodooShield,
I just figured out whats the culprit. It's Comodo. I accidentally unticked the "Detect programs which require elevated priveleges e.g. installers or updaters" in the behavior blocker section of the AV.

Thanks a lot guys for this awesome product, VoodooShield!

Sure, thank you, we appreciate that! And now we will know the next time we see that error what it means!