Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="imuade" data-source="post: 792479" data-attributes="member: 73949">So, exploit protection should work even if WD is disabled, something like smartscreen. This is good <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite109" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />Network protection is not bad, even if I have rarely seen it working when testing some phishtank links.To keep it on, I was thinking to add exclusions to WD for nearly every folder in C: (apart from tmp and downloads ones) to improve performances and then install Kaspersky anti ransomware tool for business (which comes with KSN and system watcher and can work alongside WD) as real-time protection <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite109" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="imuade, post: 792479, member: 73949"] So, exploit protection should work even if WD is disabled, something like smartscreen. This is good :) Network protection is not bad, even if I have rarely seen it working when testing some phishtank links. To keep it on, I was thinking to add exclusions to WD for nearly every folder in C: (apart from tmp and downloads ones) to improve performances and then install Kaspersky anti ransomware tool for business (which comes with KSN and system watcher and can work alongside WD) as real-time protection :) [/QUOTE]

Verification