D

Deleted member 178

I do not know if someone is encouraged to do it. a post of the configuration of those who use this program. I think it would be interesting. And we could also learn a lot of people (including me)
i checked 99% of the stuff, i left 3-4 options because they may hamper my other softs.
 
Reactions: given and bribon77

Quassar

Level 12
Verified
@Carphedon

- Latest NVT OSA is stable v1.4, a new build will be released to fix some unicode stuff.
- NVT ERP is better than OSA but more complicated.
- NVT SOB is better than ERP but even more complicated because no GUI.

Then you have plenty of product that does better (but less user-friendly) than OSA using different mechanisms (HIPS, SRP, etc..)
NVT ERP is interaction soft which make rules on alerts or manual if user change specifig settings
SOB is manual setup you need write your own rules and sob only inform you about action to this..... like in AppGuard.

However Sob is a bit diferent soft than ERP and you dont should say sob is better than ERP , because even with same rules work a bit different.
 
Reactions: given

Quassar

Level 12
Verified
Visibly you don't know much about SOB....
ERP = block only exe
SOB = block exe, dll, drivers.

So if for you , SOB isn't better than ERP...
You said what is better not me i said you dont should compare this soft because work different...
 
Reactions: given
D

Deleted member 178

You said what is better not me i said you dont should compare this soft because work different...
SOB is basiaclly ERP without a GUI and more stuff monitored, the rules syntax are probably similar, even OSA "borrowed" SOB syntax.

And i say it again SOB is better than ERP , it is a fact. SOB block more stuff, so it is better , simple as that. (i talk about protection, not color or GUI or user-friendliness)

a raincoat is better against the rain than a hat...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Quassar

Level 12
Verified
What a stupid argumentation style
most internet security software also have most modules to cover "everything" you think they are do/have better HIPS cover than Comod or another standalone software which use HIPS because they don't use other module to cover other layers......

ERP give more workplace about blocking exe fles and monitor thier action
SOB have more function however work blocking exe path and monitoring is less adjustment.
 
Reactions: given
D

Deleted member 178

What a stupid argumentation style
most internet security software also have most modules to cover "everything" you think they are do/have better HIPS cover than Comod or another standalone software which use HIPS because they don't use other module to cover other layers......
What are you talking about? i dont talk modules or suites, i talk about type of files monitored...learn to read.
Why do you think HIPS are powerful in advanced users hands? because they monitor more objects than anything else, so the user can block more stuff...

ERP give more workplace about blocking exe fles and monitor thier action
ERP can only block exes , so if the malicious file is not an exe, ERP is useless.
Many advanced attacks uses dlls and drivers, fileless malware uses dlls, try block them with ERP LOL

SOB have more function however work blocking exe path and monitoring is less adjustment.
If i block the parent exe to run, i dont have to adjust rules to block the child.
in SOB, you can create quite complex rules, and remember SOB was made during ERP v3 era, not v4.
i wait a modernized version of SOB.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reactions: given and bjm_

Windows_Security

Level 21
Content Creator
Trusted
Verified
With OSA is controlled folder access not needed? :Emsisoft Emergency Kit (EEK):

They do different things in default settings. OSA limits execution of (some) vulnarable processes and adds a (extensive) execution blacklist of common attack vectors, while Controlled folder access limits access to (some) user folders by allowing only (smartscreen cloud) whitelisted programs access to these folders.

When OSA is tweaked and allows only program execution in user space of some whitelisted vendors specific to the setup of that user than Controlled Folder Access is redundant (because local specific OSA whitelist is much more restrictive than cloud based whitelist of controlled folder access).

IMO better to keep information factual in your replies. Not every one seeking information or help has the knowledge of power users providing answers (@Umbra), so implicit opinions (like OSA makes CFA redundant) are ill advice when given unconditionally.
 
D

Deleted member 178

When OSA is tweaked and allows only program execution in user space of some whitelisted vendors specific to the setup of that user than Controlled Folder Access is redundant (because local specific OSA whitelist is much more restrictive than cloud based whitelist of controlled folder access).
That the whole point.
if you install a 3rd party security soft, it means you don't fully trust/are satisfied by what the built-in security of the OS offers, from this it is a duty to learn what the 3rd party soft can do and use it to the best way possible to supplement what the OS offers.

Using a soft at default setting is already a mistake, default setting were made to avoid installation/usability issues. NO ONE should ever use default settings. If a user can't manage or have the will to learn the software he uses, in our case OSA, better for him to stick using what Windows 10 offers.

IMO better to keep information factual in your replies. Not every one seeking information or help has the knowledge of power users providing answers (@Umbra), so implicit opinions (like OSA makes CFA redundant) are ill advice when given unconditionally.
it is isn't ill advice, just the basic logic. With OSA, user dont need CFA , simple as that.

You don't need a bullet-proof vest when you stay in a tank.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar Threads

Similar Threads