Meanwhile some engines out there are pulling an Ana de Armas — still gorgeous, but actually dangerous under the hood.![]()
Meanwhile some engines out there are pulling an Ana de Armas — still gorgeous, but actually dangerous under the hood.![]()
Can stop any infostealer, even if not in its signatures or detected by its behavioral blocker?One of the most unique features of AVG is its Browser Defense capability. This feature helps protect your sensitive information by blocking attacks that attempt to access your saved passwords or browser cookie data. It is especially effective at stopping data-stealing threats. Once an app tries to access the data you will be alerted that the suspicious app is trying to access data and to block it.
I ran a Data Stealer sample today. AVG detected it as a browser intrusion and blocked the attack. The sample was not present in the virus definitions, but the detection still occurred when Browser Defense was triggered. At the same time, the IDP (Intrusion Detection/Protection) module was also activated and successfully detected and removed the malware.Can stop any infostealer, even if not in its signatures or detected by its behavioral blocker?
This feature, if working properly, is a game changer; it's unique to Avast/AVG.
We need a video demo of how it works.
That is the catch; to evaluate the "Browser Defense" module, IDP should be disabled before testing; if not, it is the behavioral analysis which has detected the infostealer, not the Browser Defense, like K and B.Browser Defense was triggered. At the same time, the IDP (Intrusion Detection/Protection) module was also activated and successfully detected and removed the malware
My assessment was correct. The Browser Defense triggered first, and then the IDP module activated. The suspicious behavior from the data stealer initially set off the Browser Defense, and that same behavior also triggered AVG’s IDP module afterward. The browser defense blocked the attack first not IDP.That is the catch; to evaluate the "Browser Defense" module, IDP should be disabled before testing; if not, it is the behavioral analysis which has detected the infostealer, not the Browser Defense, like K and B.
So if the infostealer behavior provokes IDP anyway, what Browser Defense can do, IDP cannot?The suspicious behavior from the data stealer initially set off the Browser Defense, and that same behavior also triggered AVG’s IDP module afterward.
I cannot even copy any cookie, history and other similar files from my browser's profile to another folder without triggering this "Browser Defense" feature. So in theory, it should be able to prevent any process from accessing those files except the browser exe. I don't know if there are stealers that abuses the browser process itself to access and steal those files. If there is then that would be interestingThat is the catch; to evaluate the "Browser Defense" module, IDP should be disabled before testing; if not, it is the behavioral analysis which has detected the infostealer, not the Browser Defense, like K and B.
Yes, it is very strict and difficult to bypass, which is a good thing. Why would anyone want an app to have that level of access to their personal data?I cannot even copy any cookie, history and other similar files from my browser's profile to another folder without triggering this "Browser Defense" feature. So in theory, it should be able to prevent any process from accessing those files except the browser exe. I don't know if there are stealers that abuses the browser process itself to access and steal those files. If there is then that would be interesting![]()
Could a malicious code be injected in browser.exe to bypass Browser Guard in theory?So in theory, it should be able to prevent any process from accessing those files except the browser exe
I like this strict approach.Yes, it is very strict and difficult to bypass, which is a good thing. Why would anyone want an app to have that level of access to their personal data?
Maybe. I don't know. But that would probably fall under a browser vulnerability so should be rare if my assumption is correct.Could a malicious code be injected in browser.exe to bypass Browser Guard in theory?
Browser Guard is really a nice feature; needs more marketing.I like this strict approach.
Maybe. I don't know. But that would probably fall under a browser vulnerability so should be rare if my assumption is correct.
community.avast.com
OMG thank you so much for sharing this I'm going to download it now to see what's changed. Many thanks keeping on top of things!@nickstar1 According to AVG Beta build 26.3.10822, the user interface is gonna get some tweaks:
What is New
User Interface
Updates
- Improved product interface: Several updates improve layout consistency, button placement, and screen readability across the application.
- Clearer dialogs and messages: Updated dialogs and notifications make actions and results easier to understand.
- Better onboarding screens: Improvements to setup and welcome screens help new users get started more easily.
Languages & Translations
- Improved update experience: Updates to the update system make checking for and installing updates more reliable.
General Improvements
- Updated translations: Multiple languages received updated and improved translations for better clarity and consistency.
- Product experience improvements: Various enhancements across the application improve usability, reliability, and overall performance.
Full release notes here:
![]()
New beta version – build 26.3.10822
Hello everyone, there is a new beta version ready - build 26.3.10822. â–¶ Release notes Download links: AVG AntiVirus Free AVG Internet Security AVG Clear Enjoy this beta! We are looking forward to your feedback. AVG Teamcommunity.avast.com