Need your input for NEW zero config application sandbox

[Andy Ful]

With the demise of personal AppGuard, this sounds like a very exciting idea for a user with some standard applications.

But as @Umbra has also mentioned, I run a host of portable apps from (in my case) e.g. C:\My Portable Applications and C:\PortableApps.com etc. so 'ExeJail' may unfortunately be a non-starter for me? . Unless these can somehow be defined as 'system space'.

I love the idea though, combining the power of Excubits apps - with zero config.

Most of them will work with obligatory SmartScreen option. But, it would be hard to convince Florian for it.

 

[Windows_Security]

Maybe it would be possible to adopt online base of preconfigured settings for protected programs. That base could be actualized by the community. The SandBox will monitor protected programs according to this base.
.
Edit.
Members of this community could use Excubits demo programs (Bouncer, MemProtect, Pumpernikel) to create / test the appropriate settings.

Good idea, may be we are allowed to open a dedicated thread in the security aps section

I will collect all the names in this thread and discuss them with Florian on the 11th of December.

 

[Deleted member 178]

@Windows_Security maybe you can create a thread here : Other Security for Windows

I believe you can't have a dedicated section yet, since excubits products are quite obscure for most people.

 

[Windows_Security]

With the demise of personal AppGuard, this sounds like a very exciting idea for a user with some standard applications.

But as @Umbra has also mentioned, I run a host of portable apps from (in my case) e.g. C:\My Portable Applications and C:\PortableApps.com etc. so 'ExeJail' may unfortunately be a non-starter for me? . Unless these can somehow be defined as 'system space'.

I love the idea though, combining the power of Excubits apps - with zero config.

Well portable apps are also the easiest to contain apps. So when there are enough power users they could test and develop rules using a default folder names and folder structure e.g.
C:\PortableApps
C:\PortableApps\Browser
C:\PortableApps\Mail
C:\PortableApps\MediaPlayer
C:\PortableApps\Office
C:\PortableApps\etc

This is typical a case of 'when the mountain does not come to Mohammed then Mohammed must go to the mountain". We could make a deal when power users contribute to the configs we could not actively communicate these portable config, but faciltate them so there is a win-win situation.

 

[paulderdash]

Well portable apps are also the easiest to contain apps. So when there are enough power users they could test and develop rules using a default folder names and folder structure e.g.
C:\PortableApps
C:\PortableApps\Browser
C:\PortableApps\Mail
C:\PortableApps\MediaPlayer
C:\PortableApps\Office
C:\PortableApps\etc

This is typical a case of 'when the mountain does not come to Mohammed then Mohammed must go to the mountain". We could make a deal when power users contribute to the configs we could not actively communicate these portable config, but faciltate them so there is a win-win situation.

Good news - could give that a try. If I can somehow join a 'power user' group (not that I consider myself as such), I am happy to come to the mountain. And see if any solution will work for me.

My portable apps folders are probably unique, some needing to be positioned under root, and my backups are all defined accordingly, but maybe I can twist these into the required shape.

Edit: The price is perfectly reasonable to me.

 

[Windows_Security]

I believe you can't have a dedicated section yet, since excubits products are quite obscure for most people.

Well the idea is that a zero config JAIL would change that. Now I understand why all developers go to Wilders initially, because they get more attention. Well have to aak Dave (WildByDesign) to do the honours at Wilders, sorry folks end of party

 

[Deleted member 178]

Well the idea is that a zero config JAIL would change that. Now I understand why all developers go to Wilders initially, because they get more attention. Well have to aak Dave (WildByDesign) to do the honours at Wilders, sorry folks end of party

I think you misunderstood me, as i told earlier, just create a new thread about your product here, by "dedicated section" i meant a centralized place (subforum) where you can open many threads related to your company.

Dedicated sections are like there: Security Apps

Wilders doesn't have dedicated sections for companies (only threads) unlike here.

 

[Peter2150]

2 separate comments.

1. I keep seeing smartscreen. Wouldn't that limit it to Win 10. Florian supports win 7 - Win 10.

2. Also I see comments Appguard is dead for personal. It's not really.

3. It's truly going to be zero config, maybe as a first step, a GUI should be developed for the current drivers. I know several users are interested but they won't touch the current software.

 

[Andy Ful]

2 separate comments.

1. I keep seeing smartscreen. Wouldn't that limit it to Win 10. Florian supports win 7 - Win 10.
.

SmartScreen Application Reputation is supported only on Windows 8, 8.1, 10.

 

[Peter2150]

SmartScreen Application Reputation is supported only on Windows 8, 8.1, 10.

Yes, and Florian currrently supports at least thru Win 7. You want to through out all those users

 

[Windows_Security]

I think you misunderstood me, as i told earlier, just create a new thread about your product here, by "dedicated section" i meant a centralized place (subforum) where you can open many threads related to your company.

Dedicated sections are like there: Security Apps

Wilders doesn't have dedicated sections for companies (only threads) unlike here.

No I did not misunderstand you. On Wilders there are only a few active threads. So active threads in for instance Other anti-malware are always visible. Because Malware Tips has so many sections it is hard to find where the action is.

 

[Deleted member 178]

No I did not misunderstand you. On Wilders there are only a few active threads. So active threads in for instance Other anti-malware are always visible. Because Malware Tips has so many sections it is hard to find where the action is.

Because you don't use the "recent post" button

 

[Windows_Security]

2 separate comments.

1. I keep seeing smartscreen. Wouldn't that limit it to Win 10. Florian supports win 7 - Win 10.

2. Also I see comments Appguard is dead for personal. It's not really.

3. It's truly going to be zero config, maybe as a first step, a GUI should be developed for the current drivers. I know several users are interested but they won't touch the current software.

Peter has a point. With many companies stlll on Windows 7 and end of life of Office 2007, a zero config protection program for Office 2007 is also a possible opportunity.

Possible development calendar could be (when license earnings would justify this):

• zero config with default folders
• zero config with folders scan (for more flexibikity) and GUI supported exception rules
• use experience of GUI exception rules to launch a PRO version with
  • GUI (point is that you have to keep it simple) and
  • central library where rulesets can be downloaded per program.
• Add a corporate market admin tool for PRO version where exceptions and ruleset application can be centrally managed and deployed

So yes Peter, when the income justify the costs a GUI may be an option in the future

 

[Windows_Security]

Because you don't use the "recent post" button

I see three recent replies and three new threads, no recent posts

 

[Deleted member 178]

@Windows_Security i put a screenshot on my previous post

 

[Windows_Security]

@Windows_Security i put a screenshot on my previous post

OKAY got that, but with all post in one, the thread will sink to second page and won't attract members adding posts, so my point i still valid, end of party

A question to you: how many developers of new programs have signed on MalwareTips compared to Wilders?

MalwareTips has always more members active than Wilders, so in theory MalwareTips is more attractive to collect feedback than Wilders for developers of new programs (MT also has more testers).

What is the reason this advantage does not materialize? I can PM you the answer when you don't know it

 

[Deleted member 178]

For new devs focusing on home users, i believe MT is better than Wilders, you will have more feedbacks and less "technical" critics about this or that not doing like software X or Y.

And if you officially represent Excubits, it is your job to make it visible ; i will tell you, if your product is worthy, you won't have much difficulties to make it visible .

 

[SHvFl]

This is interesting if i don't have to make rules on my own for normal program like office for example. Will try it out when it's out and see.

 

[Duotone]

For new devs focusing on home users, i believe MT is better than Wilders, you will have more feedbacks and less "technical" critics about this or that not doing like software X or Y.

Agree with @Umbra,if you want to focus at home users and pique someone's curiosity MT would be the right choice Wilders is more technical, only knew Excubit thru wilder.

Edit:
Open one thread here and another at Wilders...

 

[Peter2150]

So yes Peter, when the income justify the costs a GUI may be an option in the future

Come on guys, back to reality. Without a GUI, there won't be any income. How many users here and at Wilders use Excubits drivers. And that in itself is the problem. They are drivers, there is no software. I've learned to use them, but I'd never but them on any friends machines. Let me say it again. No GUI, no income.