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
How Secure Are You? Testing Windows Defender Against Ransomware! (Shocking Results?) | 2024 [TESTED]
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Practical Response" data-source="post: 1085070" data-attributes="member: 109138"><p>You are hand picking one component of the route of infection which does make a difference when the product is designed to look for and respond to variables "many of these combined" </p><p></p><p>Tell me, what is the most prevalent way users end up with infections now days? Let me spell it out for you "social engineering", these come from emails, social media, baiting, ads, ect. </p><p></p><p>The user is the first line of defense, they determine if the rest of the chain is initiated, and there is a sequence just as Andy just stated himself with "real world route" which for some reason, sounds familiar <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" alt="🤔" title="Thinking face :thinking:" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/6.6/png/unicode/64/1f914.png" data-shortname=":thinking:" />, that these samples will need to take to trigger the software "as it's designed".</p><p></p><p>Upon true route of infection if tested in this way a product fails, it's because the product has "real deficiencies in it's design" and not from these "altered" incorrectly tested glimpses you see meaning at that point it's the products fault not the tester. </p><p></p><p>I don't know about you, but I would rather watch real world testing to accurately get a glimpse of a product and abilities then this so called entertainment that on its best day is still misleading... As now you are looking at the product as if it is failing and missing the whole point to most of these responses.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Practical Response, post: 1085070, member: 109138"] You are hand picking one component of the route of infection which does make a difference when the product is designed to look for and respond to variables "many of these combined" Tell me, what is the most prevalent way users end up with infections now days? Let me spell it out for you "social engineering", these come from emails, social media, baiting, ads, ect. The user is the first line of defense, they determine if the rest of the chain is initiated, and there is a sequence just as Andy just stated himself with "real world route" which for some reason, sounds familiar 🤔, that these samples will need to take to trigger the software "as it's designed". Upon true route of infection if tested in this way a product fails, it's because the product has "real deficiencies in it's design" and not from these "altered" incorrectly tested glimpses you see meaning at that point it's the products fault not the tester. I don't know about you, but I would rather watch real world testing to accurately get a glimpse of a product and abilities then this so called entertainment that on its best day is still misleading... As now you are looking at the product as if it is failing and missing the whole point to most of these responses. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top