Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Trident" data-source="post: 1036118" data-attributes="member: 99014">[USER=5403]@Nikos751[/USER] you are correct about IPS. IPS signatures are quick to deploy and block huge variety of nasties, from exploits to scams, malware calling home and many others. IPS looks at how programs communicate and that changes less from threat to threat, if at all.IPS is also extremely difficult to evade, unlike static analysis, dynamic analysis, behavioural blocking and many other methods.Apart from IPS, Norton also blocks executable content in documents similar to CheckPoint/ZoneAlarm and that alone can suspend many attacks.The observation that the antivirus is just good, I wouldn’t agree on that so much. The antivirus is top-notch but as all technologies aimed at identification of malicious code and not prevention (like sandboxing, HIPS, Application Control) it suffers natural limitations. The same limitations can be observed with all competing products.Eset specifically, hasn’t been proven to be better than Norton in anything except if HIPS is enabled and set to a more aggressive level and that’s a parade of alerts.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Trident, post: 1036118, member: 99014"] [USER=5403]@Nikos751[/USER] you are correct about IPS. IPS signatures are quick to deploy and block huge variety of nasties, from exploits to scams, malware calling home and many others. IPS looks at how programs communicate and that changes less from threat to threat, if at all. IPS is also extremely difficult to evade, unlike static analysis, dynamic analysis, behavioural blocking and many other methods. Apart from IPS, Norton also blocks executable content in documents similar to CheckPoint/ZoneAlarm and that alone can suspend many attacks. The observation that the antivirus is just good, I wouldn’t agree on that so much. The antivirus is top-notch but as all technologies aimed at identification of malicious code and not prevention (like sandboxing, HIPS, Application Control) it suffers natural limitations. The same limitations can be observed with all competing products. Eset specifically, hasn’t been proven to be better than Norton in anything except if HIPS is enabled and set to a more aggressive level and that’s a parade of alerts. [/QUOTE]

Verification