Advice Request HitmanPro.Alert worth it or not?

[Zerion]

Hello guys! Im wondering if it's worth to use HitmanPro.Alert, does it add something unique? Or is it some better product out there? Im currently using ESET Smart Security + WiseVector. Thanks for any help / input. // Best Regards

 

[Soulbound]

You dont really need such tool considering you are using ESET + WiseVector StopX

 

[Freud2004]

Hello guys! Im wondering if it's worth to use HitmanPro.Alert, does it add something unique? Or is it some better product out there? Im currently using ESET Smart Security + WiseVector. Thanks for any help / input. // Best Regards

I don't know, two similar solutions doing the same thing, accessing the same files at the same time, if this is a best practice. (ESET Smart Security + WiseVector)

 

[Zerion]

Right, thanks guys! I just thought it offered some like anti fingerprint stuff, or like keystroke encryption, vulnerable programs, etc etc.. and even deeper / better protection against ransomware. Guess it's not needed then.

 

[Soulbound]

I don't know, two similar solutions doing the same thing, accessing the same files at the same time, if this is a best practice. (ESET Smart Security + WiseVector)

he probably added exclusions and is not using WiseVector as realtime mode.

Personally i can't justify running ESET + WiseVector but everyone has different reasons behind their choice of solutions and combos.

Ive seen also Kaspesky Free combos, but that is because Kaspersky Free doesnt have the app control etc from KIS, so its understandable in a way.

 

[Ink]

No, you already have 2 RTP and latest Windows OS.

However, if they offer a trial use it and find out.

 

[Dave Russo]

It's expensive,but you get browser protection,hitman pro scanner,and it is considered to be a #1 anti-exploit ,I guess you have potential overlap if you try the trial,lose wisevector full time protection ,keep Eset

 

[dabluez98]

i recently started using it and personally like hitman pro alert - but based on 3 month usage only. it plays fine with many avs, though i am not sure if its all avs.
they did have some resignations of main people working on it lately...but i have no idea if that will have a negative impact or not.

u could wait for black friday and buy 3-years, unless you can afford it otherwise

 

[Soulbound]

Honestly it would be an overkill.

I mean, if you were to say you are running Clam AV or god forbid the current iteration of avast, then yeah.

ESET provides an overall good protection (lets not discuss hips here).

I will be honest: 30 day trial aint enough to test a security product this is why I only test when they have 90 days + occasionally.

 

[dabluez98]

Most antivirus programs can’t detect new coronavirus malware that steals victims’ money, personal data | CyberNews --> Arguably maybe when anti-virus fails like in such scenarios, although its rare. Plus, in this scenario ESET succeeded many others failed though...

 

[Freud2004]

Most antivirus programs can’t detect new coronavirus malware that steals victims’ money, personal data | CyberNews --> Arguably maybe when anti-virus fails like in such scenarios, although its rare. Plus, in this scenario ESET succeeded many others failed though...

I am not very happy with KIS:

Only ESET and AVG were able to automatically detect the Raccoon malware in all its forms

• Avira and F-Secure detected the malware in all its forms only after we ran a full scan, but did not detect it automatically
• Dr. Web completely failed to detect any forms of the malware, while Kaspersky, Bitdefender and Bullguard only detected 1 of the 4 forms of the malware
• Trend Micro and Avast were not able to detect all forms of the malware
• We checked the detection rates of these different antivirus programs using static analysis

The table below presents our full results as either a yes or no. A “Yes” with an asterisk (*) indicates that the malware was detected only after a manual full scan.

App Name	Raw file	Free Crypter	Paid Crypter #1	Paid Crypter #2
Kaspersky Antivirus	YES	NO	NO	NO
Avast	YES	YES	NO	NO
ESET	YES	YES	YES	YES
Bitdefender antivirus plus	NO	YES	NO	NO
AVG	YES	YES	YES	YES
Avira	YES*	YES*	YES*	YES*
Dr. Web	NO	NO	NO	NO
Bullguard	NO	NO	YES	NO
F-Secure	YES*	YES*	YES*	YES*
Trend Micro	YES	YES	NO	YES
Windows Defender (default AV)	YES	YES	NO	YES

 

[dabluez98]

I am not very happy with KIS:

Yes, no anti-virus is perfect though 100% of the time. These may be rare scenarios too. But that might be why a secondary solution could be useful...

 

[Cortex]

On this main newish PC I have KIS, I also have HitmanPro.Alert that I bought a long licence some time ago - I don't think I would buy it now to use with KIS but it never causes issues so with remain until it or I expire?

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Most antivirus programs can’t detect new coronavirus malware that steals victims’ money, personal data | CyberNews --> Arguably maybe when anti-virus fails like in such scenarios, although its rare. Plus, in this scenario ESET succeeded many others failed though...

From that article:

It’s also important for me to emphasize that it was difficult to get Raccoon on our VM in the first place. All of the browsers I tried (Chrome, Firefox, Edge) blocked our file from being downloaded, or deleted it immediately after running their scans.

We were finally able to bypass Edge’s block after turning off Windows Defender’s SmartScreen feature.

It’s important to reiterate that our goal here was to determine which antivirus program was the most successful in detecting a popular coronavirus-related malware using static analysis, not which crypting service was the best to help malware avoid detection. In that, there are only two options: go with either AVG or ESET.

Beyond that, if you have Windows 10 you’ll have decent protection by default. It’ll be hard to sneak coronavirus malware past your browser’s defenses, and even then your Windows machine should detect it, for the most part.

So, while geting off topic it seems that there is no need for addition protection here when it doesn't even succeed to get past a decent browser.

 

[Dave Russo]

From that article:


So, while geting off topic it seems that there is no need for addition protection here when it doesn't even succeed to get past a decent browser.

Thanks for the extra information,first reaction when (my program did not detect this "raccoon" is am I really safe from having money hacked,ect,is do I need another?) After your post glad you know that the threat is hyped apparently. Thanks