Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Security Apps
Hard_Configurator Tools
Hard_Configurator - Windows Hardening Configurator
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ForgottenSeer 97327" data-source="post: 1032229"><p>@AndyFul</p><p></p><p>Smartscreen, Cloud protection level Zero Tolerance, ISG and SAC seem to use the same back-end cloud technology, as always with Microsoft the implementations are different.</p><p></p><p>SAC seems to be a tighter omplementation of Microsoft Defender on MAX (also looks at DLL's). ConfigureDefender on MAX allowed me to install a (signed) Photobook application in user folders which did not have signed DLL's. Defender on MAX allowed that application to run while SAC blocked it.</p><p></p><p>That said I have SRP (using H_C) running on my wife's laptop for years while also running Defender on MAX (using CD), to limit the execution of risk in user folders for unelevated processes (with standard user / medium IL rights).H_C allowed me to add exceptions for the Photobook executable. Defender on MAX worked well on a Lenovo laptop, an Asus laptop (which sadly passed away when my wife spilled a mug of hot thee over it) and her latest HP laptop.</p><p></p><p>Maybe you could start a poll how many H_C users were running Defender on MAX, to get an idea of how many people would still like to have SRP using H_C with SAC?</p><p></p><p>I have an other question: Why would people need SAC when they also can run Defender on MAX (and add exceptions)? Like UAC, SAC seems to be an ALL or NOTHING first implementation, this will like UAC probably will be lowered (you already explained the differences of SAC and ISG when Defender/Smartscreen decided to allow something). My bet is that the next version of SAC will also have this ISG behaviour to enhance useability and reduce protection.</p><p></p><p>When that happens (second less rigid implementation of SAC with malware misusing this like current UAC on default), people wished they had still SRP to set a deny execute in userland <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite109" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>A benefit of H_C (on default) for people using a third-party AntiVirus would be to run it in SWH like setting with sponsor blocking for standard users. I think SAC (or WDAC ISG) has more value to people running a 3p AntiVirus (you get two for the burden/price of one) than people already running Defender on MAX.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ForgottenSeer 97327, post: 1032229"] @AndyFul Smartscreen, Cloud protection level Zero Tolerance, ISG and SAC seem to use the same back-end cloud technology, as always with Microsoft the implementations are different. SAC seems to be a tighter omplementation of Microsoft Defender on MAX (also looks at DLL's). ConfigureDefender on MAX allowed me to install a (signed) Photobook application in user folders which did not have signed DLL's. Defender on MAX allowed that application to run while SAC blocked it. That said I have SRP (using H_C) running on my wife's laptop for years while also running Defender on MAX (using CD), to limit the execution of risk in user folders for unelevated processes (with standard user / medium IL rights).H_C allowed me to add exceptions for the Photobook executable. Defender on MAX worked well on a Lenovo laptop, an Asus laptop (which sadly passed away when my wife spilled a mug of hot thee over it) and her latest HP laptop. Maybe you could start a poll how many H_C users were running Defender on MAX, to get an idea of how many people would still like to have SRP using H_C with SAC? I have an other question: Why would people need SAC when they also can run Defender on MAX (and add exceptions)? Like UAC, SAC seems to be an ALL or NOTHING first implementation, this will like UAC probably will be lowered (you already explained the differences of SAC and ISG when Defender/Smartscreen decided to allow something). My bet is that the next version of SAC will also have this ISG behaviour to enhance useability and reduce protection. When that happens (second less rigid implementation of SAC with malware misusing this like current UAC on default), people wished they had still SRP to set a deny execute in userland :) A benefit of H_C (on default) for people using a third-party AntiVirus would be to run it in SWH like setting with sponsor blocking for standard users. I think SAC (or WDAC ISG) has more value to people running a 3p AntiVirus (you get two for the burden/price of one) than people already running Defender on MAX. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top
