Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AtlBo" data-source="post: 579428" data-attributes="member: 32547">What if changes to the types of files protected by the program were sandboxed to be examined once the process has finished running or on a file by file basis?&nbsp; Would this work to protect against all types of ransomware?Even if the malware started back up the same sandboxing could be started again.&nbsp; Then as was mentioned, some sort of rollback could be put in place.&nbsp; Maybe too some support and standards from standard encryption program developers, developed in conjunction with the security companies, might be a big help with identifying ransomware too.&nbsp; Ready for ransomware to be over personally. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite112" alt=":mad:" title="Mad&nbsp; &nbsp; :mad:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":mad:" />Hope it tests better the second time around.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AtlBo, post: 579428, member: 32547"] What if changes to the types of files protected by the program were sandboxed to be examined once the process has finished running or on a file by file basis? Would this work to protect against all types of ransomware? Even if the malware started back up the same sandboxing could be started again. Then as was mentioned, some sort of rollback could be put in place. Maybe too some support and standards from standard encryption program developers, developed in conjunction with the security companies, might be a big help with identifying ransomware too. Ready for ransomware to be over personally. :mad: Hope it tests better the second time around. [/QUOTE]

Verification