- Status
For all 3rd party AVs except ESET. Stupid leftovers after uninstall that are not removed and keep running in background and uninstall can break components. For example KAV remover can break system restore.
It's a good job
This Kaspersky problem should've been fixed by now in the latest Firefox version 68.
Firefox changelog: "When an HTTPS error caused by antivirus software is detected, Firefox will attempt to automatically fix it "
when a new version of firefox is released, the problem can repeat
kaspersky used to have the same issue with chrome in the past and require a new patch update from kaspersky to fix
it seems like firefox is having a hard time dealing with AVs: kaspersky, avast, sophos,...
chrome has been stable for a while
The issue is not on Firefox's side because that's how Firefox works unlike other browsers. It uses its own certificate store instead of windows. So, they are not gonna totally change a crucial part of their product just to let Antiviruses do SSL scanning. But instead as a workaround Firefox will automatically enable the option to import root certificate from the system when this error occurs and save the preference permanently unless the user manually change it. I never liked antiviruses MITMing secure HTTPS connections as it completely breaks the purpose of HTTPS in the first place so I disable this feature on AV anyway.
A counter to this, traditional AV methods miss unknown and emerging threats, and can only be identified by advanced techniques.
Tencent PC Manager
-BB does not work offline
-cloud very unstable (BB & cloud signatures broken)
-apart from Bitdefender 3rd party engine, no offline signatures
-does scan with Bitdefender Engine only, own signatures only triggered only on access & via Download shield
-download shield and web shield (phishing / malware URL blocker) incompatible with many browsers (M$ Edge, Brave, Vivaldi, maybe Chrome)
-nearly non-existent support (difficult registration on their forum, accessible without VPN only)
-weak against signed malware
-mediocre own detection on malware <24h
-BB does not work offline
-cloud very unstable (BB & cloud signatures broken)
-apart from Bitdefender 3rd party engine, no offline signatures
-does scan with Bitdefender Engine only, own signatures only triggered only on access & via Download shield
-download shield and web shield (phishing / malware URL blocker) incompatible with many browsers (M$ Edge, Brave, Vivaldi, maybe Chrome)
-nearly non-existent support (difficult registration on their forum, accessible without VPN only)
-weak against signed malware
-mediocre own detection on malware <24h
Last edited:
what are those advanced techniques?
So not a single known problem with ESET has been found?
QuickHeal:
-very poor signature detection
-apart from Antivirus Pro, the packages are to expensive for what they deliver
-only very few useful additions in Internet Security / Total Security packages (but steep price increase)
-installers for other than English releases are very old, cannot comfirm user gets latest release
-difference between Total Security and Total Security Multi Device not clearly visible (TS Multi Device did not arrive with latest Version 18 yet but stuck at v17, an issue because of many improvements in v18)
-very poor signature detection
-apart from Antivirus Pro, the packages are to expensive for what they deliver
-only very few useful additions in Internet Security / Total Security packages (but steep price increase)
-installers for other than English releases are very old, cannot comfirm user gets latest release
-difference between Total Security and Total Security Multi Device not clearly visible (TS Multi Device did not arrive with latest Version 18 yet but stuck at v17, an issue because of many improvements in v18)
Last edited:
Look it up.what are those advanced techniques?
By traditional, I mean downloading signatures locally to detect unknown malware. Practically useless.
Qihoo 360:
-free version with ads and nags
-paid version does not give any security related improvements at all
-promised early upgrade never noticed when using premium
-does not notify on new version unless manual update is triggered
-HIPS are almost useless against common malware (does prevent AutoRun, but malware can still submit and steal data)
-good signatures, but without signatures, system is very likely to get infected
-weak against process hollowing
-HIPS do not freeze malware, it can happily harm the system until user action / 30 seconds until autoblock
->RANSOMWARE :emoji_fearful:
-pseudo-firewall does block almost nothing (seems to be a network monitor rather with the option to manually block - but why pay for?)
-free version with ads and nags
-paid version does not give any security related improvements at all
-promised early upgrade never noticed when using premium
-does not notify on new version unless manual update is triggered
-HIPS are almost useless against common malware (does prevent AutoRun, but malware can still submit and steal data)
-good signatures, but without signatures, system is very likely to get infected
-weak against process hollowing
-HIPS do not freeze malware, it can happily harm the system until user action / 30 seconds until autoblock
->RANSOMWARE :emoji_fearful:
-pseudo-firewall does block almost nothing (seems to be a network monitor rather with the option to manually block - but why pay for?)
there are some. most of them are related to its protection. I can submit some but I'm afraid some ESET users may disagreeSo not a single known problem with ESET has been found?
add :
useless bloatware
high rate of false positives
ignorant / incompatible customer support
telemetry / spying / data harvesting
bd signatures have updating issues
sandbox is weak
I'm sure we all respect your opinions, I know I do! IMHO it's not necessarily a case of disagreeing, for me it's a case of balancing up the known info & making a decision thereby accepting the risk factor balanced against the advantages - We do that in all things in life I feel
KIS - Quite brilliant: But on all PC's I own (and actually ones I don't) drops the speed of all VPN's I've used by 30% or more, (no issues without a VPN) not found a way round it other than using KAV, with maybe less protection.
Edit: Depending on your connection speed this may or may not be an issue.
Edit: Depending on your connection speed this may or may not be an issue.
Last edited:
ESET:
- The UI is very confusing with small text and grouped settings. Not easy for new users (I had problems with tweaking)
- Scan mode ("Scan On" option) in "Real-time file system protection" needs more detail explanation in app when clicking on the ! mark. Users have to visit help.eset.com to read more detail about it (and they do explain)
- Poor zero-day protection = silent HIPS in default settings
- Newly developed Behavioral blocker is not yet competent
- HIPS is HIPS. it can block everything including safe files. It's not easy and takes time to configure => not user-friendly (any HIPS in general)
+ HIPS can make your PC unbootable if you don't know how to use it
- "Enable detection of potentially unsafe applications" is a real FP machine (not to be confused with "Enable... unwanted applications" = detecting PUPs). This blocked too many files on my PC. However, the option contributes to ESET's great signatures => FPs (That's why they give an option to enable or disable it during installation, but not the other one)
- No free version
- Admins usually find a lot of reasons to defend their products when there is a flaw or bypass discovered by an organization or an user
(- for unknown reason, my first installation of ESET made my PC unusable until I went to Safe Mode and uninstalled ESET. The second try worked)
- The UI is very confusing with small text and grouped settings. Not easy for new users (I had problems with tweaking)
- Scan mode ("Scan On" option) in "Real-time file system protection" needs more detail explanation in app when clicking on the ! mark. Users have to visit help.eset.com to read more detail about it (and they do explain)
- Poor zero-day protection = silent HIPS in default settings
- Newly developed Behavioral blocker is not yet competent
- HIPS is HIPS. it can block everything including safe files. It's not easy and takes time to configure => not user-friendly (any HIPS in general)
+ HIPS can make your PC unbootable if you don't know how to use it
- "Enable detection of potentially unsafe applications" is a real FP machine (not to be confused with "Enable... unwanted applications" = detecting PUPs). This blocked too many files on my PC. However, the option contributes to ESET's great signatures => FPs (That's why they give an option to enable or disable it during installation, but not the other one)
- No free version
- Admins usually find a lot of reasons to defend their products when there is a flaw or bypass discovered by an organization or an user
(- for unknown reason, my first installation of ESET made my PC unusable until I went to Safe Mode and uninstalled ESET. The second try worked)
- Status
