Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
Ransomware Test: Cylance, Sophos, VoodooShield | by VoodooShield
Message
<blockquote data-quote="danb" data-source="post: 635688" data-attributes="member: 62850"><p>This is Dan with VoodooShield... I am not going to get into a long argument with you, but just to explain a couple of things...</p><p></p><p>The CylancePROTECT configuration was configured manually by Dan and Joel of MalwareManaged for testing purposes with PUP detection enabled... they fully understood that I was testing their product. They actually emailed me out of the blue when they realized that I was testing so much malware, and asked if they could custom configure their product specifically for testing. They can confirm this, and if not, I still have all of the emails.</p><p></p><p>Sophos was tested with all default settings.</p><p></p><p>Sure, there are a lot of enterprise products that have an application whitelisting component... but according to MalwareManaged and Black Cipher (another Cylance reseller) and other endpoint protection vendors, smb and enterprise customers almost always disable the application whitelisting component. The reality is... unless application whitelisting is made user-friendly, it will NEVER be adopted by the masses... either consumers, SMB or enterprise. Everyone... well, most people understand this.</p><p></p><p>Yeah, if you only tested 100 samples with VS on AutoPilot, that is pretty much the exact same result I get every time I test... around 99-99.5%, so that sounds about right to me. If you tested with VS in Smart or Always ON mode, there is not a chance that something slipped by it, unless you clicked allow. If this is what you are suggesting, then you obviously have not tested VS in Smart or Always ON mode.</p><p></p><p>Sure, VS works much better when it has an internet connection... but then again, how is the computer going to become infected if it is not on the internet? USB drive? That is covered too.</p><p></p><p>I totally agree... people should test for themselves, I have been saying that for years now. However, I highly recommend that they not download test samples from malware repositories that have connections to ANY security software vendors.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="danb, post: 635688, member: 62850"] This is Dan with VoodooShield... I am not going to get into a long argument with you, but just to explain a couple of things... The CylancePROTECT configuration was configured manually by Dan and Joel of MalwareManaged for testing purposes with PUP detection enabled... they fully understood that I was testing their product. They actually emailed me out of the blue when they realized that I was testing so much malware, and asked if they could custom configure their product specifically for testing. They can confirm this, and if not, I still have all of the emails. Sophos was tested with all default settings. Sure, there are a lot of enterprise products that have an application whitelisting component... but according to MalwareManaged and Black Cipher (another Cylance reseller) and other endpoint protection vendors, smb and enterprise customers almost always disable the application whitelisting component. The reality is... unless application whitelisting is made user-friendly, it will NEVER be adopted by the masses... either consumers, SMB or enterprise. Everyone... well, most people understand this. Yeah, if you only tested 100 samples with VS on AutoPilot, that is pretty much the exact same result I get every time I test... around 99-99.5%, so that sounds about right to me. If you tested with VS in Smart or Always ON mode, there is not a chance that something slipped by it, unless you clicked allow. If this is what you are suggesting, then you obviously have not tested VS in Smart or Always ON mode. Sure, VS works much better when it has an internet connection... but then again, how is the computer going to become infected if it is not on the internet? USB drive? That is covered too. I totally agree... people should test for themselves, I have been saying that for years now. However, I highly recommend that they not download test samples from malware repositories that have connections to ANY security software vendors. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top