Not very often.
As long as you use common sense when online you'll be fine. I run Office 2007 with ConfigureDefender @ modified Max and no problems. Like yourself, I hardly use Office.Does this mean that if I stay with WD with Configure defender, without enabling DocumentsAntiExploit and Paranoid Extensions, I will be safer?
You are right. Just have a free subscription for ESET (AV) and I'm thinking of using it, so wanted to compare pros and cons.As long as you use common sense when online you'll be fine. I run Office 2007 with ConfigureDefender @ modified Max and no problems. Like yourself, I hardly use Office.
Good internet hygiene goes a long way. Remember, with ConfigureDefender your security is light years ahead of the average user.
My motto: "Stay safe, not paranoid!"
Thank you. Does this mean that if I stay with WD with Configure defender, without enabling DocumentsAntiExploit and Paranoid Extensions, I will be safer?
Possible error with FWH 2011: a blank rule, which I marked with a red dotHard_Configurator 22.214.171.124 beta1:
What is new:
1. Added <Block AppInstaller> option.
2. New FirewallHardening version 126.96.36.199.
- added the options to load/save the external BlockLists.
- added new LOLBins (EXE files): bitsadmin (blocked via Exploit Protection), calc, certoc, certreq, cmd, desktopimgdownldr, dllhost, ExtExport, findstr, ieexec (new path), notepad, pktmon, Register-cimprovider, verclsid, wsl, wuauclt.exe, xwizard.
Updating from the ver. 188.8.131.52
- Set <MORE SRP ...><Block AppInstaller> = ON (new option).
- Update the rules in FirewallHardening by using the <Load> option to load the file UpdateFirewallHardening2011.fwbl. Some new LOLBins will appear on the BlockList as Inactive - they can be activated by the user if necessary.
The LOLBin DesktopImgDownldr is not currently fully blocked by FirewallHardening - the connections are blocked only if the code is injected into it for spying. If it will be used in the wild as a LOLBin downloader (can use BITS) then I will consider blocking it via Exploit Protection.
Possible error with FWH 2011: a blank rule, which I marked with a red dot
OK thanks does anyone know if h_c is compatable with nanominer gpu mining cryptocurrencies
I am trying to find a balance between privacy and security. Are there a any settings, which could be changed from the recommended settings, which increase privacy more, than they decrease security?
I am thinking about something like SmartScreen for MS Edge, which first checks URL's on a local list and if it's not found in the top visited websites, it will send the URL, infos about the website and a device ID to Microsoft. I wonder how much of my browsing history is being sent to Microsoft this way and if it is really worth using SmartScreen on Edge. What would you recommend? Is there also a possibility to only allow local checks?
No. I can use it without any problem with H_C, ConfigureDefender, and FirewallHardening all set to MAX settings.I tried to use the Microsoft Diagnostic Data Viewer, to get a feeling about how much data is being sent to Microsoft, but somehow it always shows, that I don't have access to this data. Is this a known problem with HC?
What does "Edge (not Chromium)" under "Smartscreen" mean in the HC ConfigureDefender menu?
My HC setup is: recommended settings in the main menu, ConfigureDefender on Max and FirewallHardening with all 4 available lists added to block.
- If you block LOLBins in H_C, is there additional value in blocking them with the Firewall Hardening tool or is there overlap?
- In AppGuard, we have the option to allow installs or shut everything off if needed through the agent app in the tray. In H_C I know there is the app to quickly switch default deny off or on, but if there are other restrictions impacting a specific task or application it appears that I would have to open H_C to switch those off - is that correct? I have some apps that I occasionally use that require access to one of the blocked sponsors, and it's nice to just be able to quickly switch off all restrictions temporarily. I wouldn't be asking these questions if I was totally thrilled with AppGuard.