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
Security
General Security Discussions
Inside Microsoft's plan to kill PPLFault
Message
<blockquote data-quote="danb" data-source="post: 1059527" data-attributes="member: 62850"><p>The file is executed and a lot of data is extracted and evaluated. I hope to be able to do this with ISG as well soon, and then compare the SmartScreen results.</p><p></p><p>MS Defender is disabled during the tests (as it is in almost all malware tests), so I have no idea if MD would have blocked the malware or not, since that was not the focus of the analysis.</p><p></p><p>My only point is that a lot of people consider WDAC + ISG to be deny-by-default / zero-trust, when it actually is not. In other words, one cannot cobble together 3-4 relatively effective security layers, and honestly claim that it is true zero-trust. In order to be true zero-trust, there needs to be a single monolithic blocking mechanism that blocks everything that needs to be blocked. It is nice to have extra layers as an added precaution, but the main blocking mechanism should not be easily bypassable for the same attack vector if the samples change slightly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="danb, post: 1059527, member: 62850"] The file is executed and a lot of data is extracted and evaluated. I hope to be able to do this with ISG as well soon, and then compare the SmartScreen results. MS Defender is disabled during the tests (as it is in almost all malware tests), so I have no idea if MD would have blocked the malware or not, since that was not the focus of the analysis. My only point is that a lot of people consider WDAC + ISG to be deny-by-default / zero-trust, when it actually is not. In other words, one cannot cobble together 3-4 relatively effective security layers, and honestly claim that it is true zero-trust. In order to be true zero-trust, there needs to be a single monolithic blocking mechanism that blocks everything that needs to be blocked. It is nice to have extra layers as an added precaution, but the main blocking mechanism should not be easily bypassable for the same attack vector if the samples change slightly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top