That's a good question. I'm really not to sure, it's hard to tell, but I uninstalled it temporarily the other day and I used revo uninstaller. After deleting a few minor leftover folders, one I noticed was called certificates, so maybe it does, but it could be for something else entirely.
Sophos Home Premium - June 2019 Report
- Thread starter harlan4096
- Start date
Please read older Sophos Home threads, some of the questions you are asking are already answered before.
Advice Request - Sophos Home Premium is now on my main PC!
Hello members! Today I have done a clean install of Windows 10 Pro and I installed Sophos Home Premium instead of KIS. To be honest, it took me days to decide to take this step. Although I am happy with KIS, I wanted to change for the sake of change. I instantly installed SHP after I finished...
malwaretips.com
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
Ok saw that, but I guess I don’t understand how they are scanning https. Maybe I am not learned enough.Please read older Sophos Home threads, some of the questions you are asking are already answered before.
Advice Request - Sophos Home Premium is now on my main PC!
Hello members! Today I have done a clean install of Windows 10 Pro and I installed Sophos Home Premium instead of KIS. To be honest, it took me days to decide to take this step. Although I am happy with KIS, I wanted to change for the sake of change. I instantly installed SHP after I finished...
Please read older Sophos Home threads, some of the questions you are asking are already answered before.
Advice Request - Sophos Home Premium is now on my main PC!
Hello members! Today I have done a clean install of Windows 10 Pro and I installed Sophos Home Premium instead of KIS. To be honest, it took me days to decide to take this step. Although I am happy with KIS, I wanted to change for the sake of change. I instantly installed SHP after I finished...
Thanks @davisd, I totally forgot that it was posted there, it's been a while lol.
- Jun 4, 2017
- 174
There is a big difference if someone is just checking if an URL is bad or if the content which is transferred is scanned.
I talked the Sophos support some time ago and they told me that HTTPS interception is not planned...
Even downloading an Eicar via HTTPS is first seen from SHP when the file hits the disk...
So no, there is no scanning of HTTPS.
I talked the Sophos support some time ago and they told me that HTTPS interception is not planned...
Even downloading an Eicar via HTTPS is first seen from SHP when the file hits the disk...
So no, there is no scanning of HTTPS.
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
Thanks, that’s what I was trying to understand. They are just blocking bad IPs. The support person I talked to didn’t seem to know that was what I was trying to ask.
- May 9, 2019
- 349
Some extra information about the scan options (I asked it at Sophos support to be certain ):
The "Scan Computer" button located in the GUI is using Hitman Pro which requires an internet connection as this is an online scanner.
The "Scan with Sophos Home" option that is available in Windows Explorer uses the Sophos Antivirus scanner which does not require an internet connection as it uses that latest downloaded virus definitions.
I tested the HTTPS scanfunction again. Glashouse nailed it. Other products are using HTTPS scanning (UTM and XG) but at the moment HTTPS scanning option is not available in SHP.
):The "Scan Computer" button located in the GUI is using Hitman Pro which requires an internet connection as this is an online scanner.
The "Scan with Sophos Home" option that is available in Windows Explorer uses the Sophos Antivirus scanner which does not require an internet connection as it uses that latest downloaded virus definitions.
I tested the HTTPS scanfunction again. Glashouse nailed it. Other products are using HTTPS scanning (UTM and XG) but at the moment HTTPS scanning option is not available in SHP.
- Jul 27, 2015
- 5,458
Premium Scan vs Full Scan.
support.home.sophos.com
support.home.sophos.com
Running a Premium scan on Windows
Applies to: Sophos Home Premium (Windows) only Customers running Sophos Home are protected by its real-time features, which will detect and stop threats as they try to access their systems. However...
Running a full system scan on Windows
Applies to: Sophos Home Premium and Free (Windows) Customers running Sophos Home are protected by its real-time features, which will detect and stop threats as they try to access their systems. How...
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
Super helpful, thank you!Premium Scan vs Full Scan.
Running a Premium scan on Windows
Applies to: Sophos Home Premium (Windows) only Customers running Sophos Home are protected by its real-time features, which will detect and stop threats as they try to access their systems. However...Running a full system scan on Windows
Applies to: Sophos Home Premium and Free (Windows) Customers running Sophos Home are protected by its real-time features, which will detect and stop threats as they try to access their systems. How...
I do agree it has quite a few processes but i actually like it. It's almost to *nix philosophy on do one thing & do it well. Each process from my use has been extremely light. Coming from Bitdefender where is also quite a few processes (but not probably note quite as many) but the thing about bitdefender if your lucky the security service is consuming less than 200MB but usually its between 200-400MB. I've even seen it go above 400MB before. I can load an entire OS (Linux + a DE (Xfce or Mate)) and consume about what bitdefender is consuming which is absolutely crazy. Though i think bitdefender is one of the better AVs.
Pretty sure it doesn't. I looked for a cert after installing it and couldn't find one. Its probably like emsisoft that just uses DNS to block which i actually prefer. I don't like to MITM. Too many companies have screwed up their certs in the past. On top of that uninstall any AV product and see they they always leave crap around (like their certs). Which could be dangerous. At least i haven't found one that has cleaned up after itself yet (not saying there isn't one).
Really interested in this topic because i'm thinking on switching to it. So far i really like it but i just want to see how the 0 day protection (interceptor x) pans out. While they say interceptor x is implemented in the product the fine grained controls are not there. Right now i'm using both bitdefender & emsisoft. While i'm love emsisoft i'm not willing to pay what it would cost me for the licensing fees. If i had just a few computers it wouldn't be a big deal i have money (especially when you consider VMs) and and i'm just not going to spend 100s of dollars every year. Bitdefender is great (especially with their family plan) but its soooo heavy. Most of my VMs i use dynamic memory on and a lot of memory the vm is using is coming from bitdefender so i need something lighter. The only other thing is i think some of the free AV are good but as you know when your not paying for the product then you are the product and i'm not ok with that. To bad emsisoft doesn't offer a family play like bitdender.
Last edited:
- Apr 28, 2015
- 8,948
Some impressions of SHP after my 1st test:
- Seems it suffers the same or similar issue as BitDefender Free, it takes long to process the threats. It's quite fast in the 1st blocking warning, but until finally deletes and sends the warning of deletion, it may takes until 2 minutes in some cases
- I don't like the way it shows the reports of demand scans, it impossible (several/many screenshots would be necessary) to get a general view of the samples were detected/removed, and the same for Quarantine reports...
- To speed up checking events, I managed the Web Console in my main host, while I was testing inside the VM, anyway it is far from being comfortable and fast.
- I'm not sure... but seems SHP does not include Kaspersky engine (only for exe files as in HMP). I ran in the same VM a scan with HMP stand alone and it detected an exe file via KL engine (UDS) that SHP System Scan did not catch
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
I came home to 4 alerts on my machine yesterday. SHP had quarantined some of Andy’s tools. The cloud management in this case is more obnoxious than expected. And I agree how it reports items is disjointed.Some impressions of SHP after my 1st test:
- Seems it suffers the same or similar issue as BitDefender Free, it takes long to process the threats. It's quite fast in the 1st blocking warning, but until finally deletes and sends the warning of deletion, it may takes until 2 minutes in some cases
- I don't like the way it shows the reports of demand scans, it impossible (several/many screenshots would be necessary) to get a general view of the samples were detected/removed, and the same for Quarantine reports...
- To speed up checking events, I managed the Web Console in my main host, while I was testing inside the VM, anyway it is far from being comfortable and fast.
- I'm not sure... but seems SHP does not include Kaspersky engine (only for exe files as in HMP). I ran in the same VM a scan with HMP stand alone and it detected an exe file via KL engine (UDS) that SHP System Scan did not catch
Some impressions of SHP after my 1st test:
- Seems it suffers the same or similar issue as BitDefender Free, it takes long to process the threats. It's quite fast in the 1st blocking warning, but until finally deletes and sends the warning of deletion, it may takes until 2 minutes in some cases
- I don't like the way it shows the reports of demand scans, it impossible (several/many screenshots would be necessary) to get a general view of the samples were detected/removed, and the same for Quarantine reports...
- To speed up checking events, I managed the Web Console in my main host, while I was testing inside the VM, anyway it is far from being comfortable and fast.
- I'm not sure... but seems SHP does not include Kaspersky engine (only for exe files as in HMP). I ran in the same VM a scan with HMP stand alone and it detected an exe file via KL engine (UDS) that SHP System Scan did not catch
I agree.
I've noticed this too when I try a test from ATMSO. Detection popup really quick, but the actual removal/delete is slow. I find WD similar in this regard.
They definitely can do a better job of the reports. I think it's one of those things where they took an enterprise model and are applying it for the home. I think it's a great idea, a good way to differentiate yourself from the rest, but it still requires some work. V2 was a great improvement, I'm sure v3 will make it better.
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
I’m going to try to give it some time. The cloud management to manage all computers in my home is appealing. This morning my web browsers were dragging, a restart fixed that (which was plenty fast btw). Assuming is was SHP since that’s the only difference and that’s never happened, but not 100%. Still think it’s a step back in terms of performance from the improved WD.I agree.
I've noticed this too when I try a test from ATMSO. Detection popup really quick, but the actual removal/delete is slow. I find WD similar in this regard.
They definitely can do a better job of the reports. I think it's one of those things where they took an enterprise model and are applying it for the home. I think it's a great idea, a good way to differentiate yourself from the rest, but it still requires some work. V2 was a great improvement, I'm sure v3 will make it better.
Last edited:
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
Okay, I have narrowed down that Firefox seems to go slower with SHP installed. Chrome based browsers don't seem to. Has anyone noticed this? Is it just me? Am I crazy?
- May 10, 2019
- 2,289
I have not used SHP for a while now. But when I did, yes it slowed down FF a bit.
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
Man, that is borderline a deal breaker. It is NOTICEABLY slower.
- May 10, 2019
- 2,289
I know how it feels. Anyway SHP is a great product and, surely, it will be improved over time.
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,868
It definitely is. I like it for the most part. Seems to be moving in the right direction.
Ya i had similar experience. I always install sysinternal tools on all my machine. It quarantined 2 of the sysinternal tools: PSExe & PSKill. At first i was quite surprised since these come directly from Microsoft and are signed by Microsoft but after thinking for awhile it makes some sense. These tools are extremely useful but can be dangerous in the wrong hands. I think I've heard they can be distributed by malware for wrong doing.
Andy's tools were probably quarantined because of file reputation (not that many people using it) so taking the stance is better to be safe that sorry.
So far i'm still liking the product and its on my list of possible products to replace bitdefender when my license expires. Hopefully in bitdefender 2020 they have addressed the resource usage but honestly i don't have a lot of hope.
Similar threads
