G-Data vs Central Intelligence

[L0ckJaw]

My data remains in Europe.

 

[mekelek]

from GData yea, from Malware, i don't think so.

 

[L0ckJaw]

from GData yea, from Malware, i don't think so.

?

 

[Arequire]

Don't be fooled by the marketing. Europe isn't the bastion of privacy it's made out to be, especially Germany:
German spy agency systematically broke the law: report | DW | 01.09.2016
Spying Close to Home: German Intelligence Under Fire for NSA Cooperation - SPIEGEL ONLINE - International

 

[L0ckJaw]

Rather trust the EU than the other continents
Spiegel = Fake news site
The other DW.com ? never heard of it

 

[Arequire]

Rather trust the EU than the other continents

Me too. I just find their marketing about Germany being some bastion of privacy as misleading.

Spiegel = Fake news site

Always factual in reporting from what I've read. Sites rating such things report the same. Slightly Left political bias in reporting though.

The other DW.com ? never heard of it

DW is Germany's international public broadcaster.

 

[mekelek]

?

you should be more concerned about the malware getting through your security cause that's 100% going into the malicious hands.

 

[Deleted member 178]

Watch Homeland TV show (quite realistic), and don't won't worry about privacy, because you never had it from the start.

 

[Sunshine-boy]

?

He means you are probably safe from intelligence agencies but not from malware

 

[Bleak]

don't won't worry about privacy, because you never had it from the start.

Agree.

It's funny how some people who think, for example, Facebook doesn't have their info because they're not on Facebook. The company is massive and it is most likely with all your care and protection they already do. Same goes with every major company.

The data collection at such major companies occurs on millions of users that is used to analyze and influence trends, no one at these companies is sitting to collect your data alone.

Nowadays I think there's no sense to get paranoid about this, as it is too late to do so, but I think what we should do is at least try to minimize it as much as possible, but you can not avoid it as an individual.

 

[L0ckJaw]

you should be more concerned about the malware getting through your security cause that's 100% going into the malicious hands.

Well so are you and everyone else

 

[Deleted member 178]

but I think what we should do is at least try to minimize it as much as possible, but you can not avoid it as an individual.

yes, one simple thing, avoid to use your real name as much as you can for non-administrative/banking sites and never use your real name alongside your real picture.

 

[L0ckJaw]

Damn my real name is L0ckJaw

 

[mekelek]

Well so are you and everyone else

i'm, hence i'm using Kaspersky.

 

[L0ckJaw]

i'm, hence i'm using Kaspersky.

Ok be happy with it dont want to start a flamewar m8 !

 

[mekelek]

Ok be happy with it dont want to start a flamewar m8 !

no flaming we good
just that the hub's tests sometimes are misleading, you only know the full story when you do the test yourself.

 

[Deleted Member 3a5v73x]

no flaming we good
just that the hub's tests sometimes are misleading, you only know the full story when you do the test yourself.

Hey, I wasn't fast enough to reply on your pre-edit post, according to @Faybert 's march test AV Test - MalwareTips Complete Report - March 2018 - G Data
it did pretty well, got some info to share what you were talking about those 20 malware packs and 70%? Did it fail at some point in your testing and let some ##### walk through BB?

Edit: Oh, just read your updates in security setup, didn't quite understand what you had there. Not to defend G Data particulary, but security softs do indeed work differently in VM's, or might not work at all sometimes as they were intended to.

 

[mekelek]

Hey, I wasn't fast enough to reply on your pre-edit post, according to @Faybert 's march test AV Test - MalwareTips Complete Report - March 2018 - G Data
it did pretty well, got some info to share what you were talking about those 20 malware packs and 70%? Did it fail at some point in your testing and let some ##### walk through BB?

as you can see from the chart, those big sample packages have 70-80% static detection and the leftover 4-5 samples were doc's and phising pdfs and scripts that couldn't make a connection anymore

one of them had that nasty java malware that almost every AV let through that had no signature on it, including GData.(Kaspersky did not, without sigs)

don't get me wrong, GData's BB is really good, it's just the fact that there are 3 main components, Signatures, BB, Firewall, and those 3 sometimes not enough, especially when it's Bitdefender signatures (they're hella late).

one of the main thing it really misses is a cloud/reputation based module, like the one in AVG/Avast, Kaspersky, Norton, ESET, Emsisoft etc

GData's BB is effective against most things, but generic malware just slips through(generic meaning it's not trying to encrypt stuff, or steal stuff). also has zero exploit protection, try to run HitmanPro Alert's exploit test, you will be scared.

I would strongly suggest to run something alongside GData that can get you VT results (like VS or SecureAPlus) or something AI/ML based (MAX, but MAX hates GData exe-s), even though I could see GData having their own sigs before BD sigs came but it was still late in my book.

oh and at least OSArmor, for exploit protection

ps: the exploit test tool: http://dl.surfright.nl/hmpalert-test.exe
try it yourself, they're harmless.

 

[Deleted member 65228]

It's funny how some people who think, for example, Facebook doesn't have their info because they're not on Facebook. The company is massive and it is most likely with all your care and protection they already do. Same goes with every major company.

The data collection at such major companies occurs on millions of users that is used to analyze and influence trends, no one at these companies is sitting to collect your data alone.

The bigger picture is that collected data can sometimes be audited by the customer but not actually cleared out completely. If your account were to be hacked on Facebook or Google (e.g. an attacker infected your system and installed a keylogger, a service was hacked and a dump was posted online regarding credentials and it was not encrypted, etc.) then an attacker can theoretically and potentially (depending on the service) run off with years worth of intelligence collected on you. Advertisement profiling, call logs, e-mails sent and received, personal and confidential chat conversations, contacts lists, search history, YouTube watch history, recorded download logs, etc.

You're right regarding surveillance even if you do not use a service, that's factual and not opinionated. It's well-known that vendors like Google and Facebook and some others have plug-ins active on many websites... Google Analytics is likely the most famous of them all. There are also many services which actually support screen-capture of the browser window which has the website loaded, or keystroke theft from forms even if they were not sent in by the website viewer in the end.

There is never ever going to be 100% privacy on the internet and there never really has been but the point is that the more data being collected whether accessible to our eyes or not means that more damage can be done in the long-run in the case of an incident. The more data collected means the more data which can be theoretically stolen in the case of a breach, etc.

Furthermore, a majority do not even realize how much surveillance is being performed on various services - and they may be forced into using the service for work-related reasons. If you ask a random stranger for their call logs, contact lists and all the e-mails they have ever sent and received, do you think they would give it to you? Once their Google account gets breached, it's game over. Truly game over to the point that a backup revert will not solve - the attacker can take out the data from the account and forever have a 10GB archive of the past 10 years activity from the poor individual despite password/account detail changes after recovery.

There's nothing that can be done to remove surveillance and it can be beneficial for some things - and legally services can do whatever as long as their Terms of Service are legal and accepted - but the real issue here in my opinion is how much damage that can be done if that data became exposed. Look at Facebook and the recent events, all that data stored on another companies servers when they shouldn't have had it for even half the time they did.

Quite frankly I couldn't care less if my Gmail e-mails were stored on Google servers for eternity, but would I care if I slipped up and my Gmail account were to be hacked and all of the e-mails (including deleted ones from my inbox and trash folder) were exposed by the take out data and handed right over to the attacker? Of course I would!

 

[illumination]

Nowadays I think there's no sense to get paranoid about this, as it is too late to do so, but I think what we should do is at least try to minimize it as much as possible, but you can not avoid it as an individual.

The underline hits the nail on the head. I have said it before many times, they can not collect what you do not divulge, it is that simple. There is no need to worry about the other that you can not control, much like life.