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
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
Security
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
HitManPro vs a Zero-Day Botnet
Message
<blockquote data-quote="cutting_edgetech" data-source="post: 664199" data-attributes="member: 5778"><p>Unless SOPHOS also supported this claim then it's like bashing a product based on the ignorance of someone that has nothing to do with the product. Did any of the people making these claims work for SOPHOS? People will watch your video, and think HMP failed the test, when in fact it was the wrong product to test.</p><p></p><p>You mentioned Zemana AM being good at detecting process hollowing when used as a second opinion scanner, but you point out that HMP is not. Well, HMPA is the equivalent option to Zemana AM, and not HMP. What are the test results when using HMPA against process hollowing? Just because HMPA detects process hollowing in a different way does not mean it should fail the test.</p><p></p><p>EDITED 8/22/17 @ 2:59:</p><p>I think the best solution is to test your sample against HMP, and HMPA. Then you can prove those wrong that made the claim that HMP will detect this type of threat, while also being fair to SOPHOS since HMPA is the product designed to protect against this threat.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cutting_edgetech, post: 664199, member: 5778"] Unless SOPHOS also supported this claim then it's like bashing a product based on the ignorance of someone that has nothing to do with the product. Did any of the people making these claims work for SOPHOS? People will watch your video, and think HMP failed the test, when in fact it was the wrong product to test. You mentioned Zemana AM being good at detecting process hollowing when used as a second opinion scanner, but you point out that HMP is not. Well, HMPA is the equivalent option to Zemana AM, and not HMP. What are the test results when using HMPA against process hollowing? Just because HMPA detects process hollowing in a different way does not mean it should fail the test. EDITED 8/22/17 @ 2:59: I think the best solution is to test your sample against HMP, and HMPA. Then you can prove those wrong that made the claim that HMP will detect this type of threat, while also being fair to SOPHOS since HMPA is the product designed to protect against this threat. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top