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
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
Software
Security Apps
Other security for Windows, Mac, Linux
Still using Zemana on-demand scanner? Which version do you prefer?
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Evjl&#039;s Rain" data-source="post: 831464" data-attributes="member: 51905"><p>No I mean only the scanner. zemana is really bad at realtime protection. The scanner is much much more powerful and can detect a lot of things that ZAM's realtime protection misses</p><p></p><p>the way to use zemana scanner properly:</p><p>- perform a scan (smart scan): it can detects active malwares, PUPs, DNS hijacking and process hollowing</p><p>- after that, go to C:\ -> drag "Users" folder to zemana's box to perform a custom scan</p><p></p><p>the scanning of users folder will find some more malwares that smartscan ignores</p><p></p><p>Norton NPE:</p><p>it detects files based on reputation = the number of users is less than 100 or the file is marked as untrustworthy by users or developers -> the best for unknown malwares but with high FP rate</p><p>It's signatureless, but after detecting something, users have an option to upload and check the file with Norton database -> good</p><p>to make NPE more useful, you can perform a custom scan of Users folder like zemana. It detects some more malwares that the normal scan misses according to what I saw in the hub</p><p></p><p>HMP:</p><p>there are 4 engines so it is great. You can also enable EWS (early warning scoring). It's similar to NPE when this option is enabled but not as well-developed , IMO</p><p>HMP is only bad at PUPs and fileless malwares. The rest is great thanks to BD and Kaspersky engines</p><p>but BD engine has been weak for a few recent years</p><p></p><p>at the end: I think NPE is a must-have scanner. We can ignore the rest but more is better</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Evjl's Rain, post: 831464, member: 51905"] No I mean only the scanner. zemana is really bad at realtime protection. The scanner is much much more powerful and can detect a lot of things that ZAM's realtime protection misses the way to use zemana scanner properly: - perform a scan (smart scan): it can detects active malwares, PUPs, DNS hijacking and process hollowing - after that, go to C:\ -> drag "Users" folder to zemana's box to perform a custom scan the scanning of users folder will find some more malwares that smartscan ignores Norton NPE: it detects files based on reputation = the number of users is less than 100 or the file is marked as untrustworthy by users or developers -> the best for unknown malwares but with high FP rate It's signatureless, but after detecting something, users have an option to upload and check the file with Norton database -> good to make NPE more useful, you can perform a custom scan of Users folder like zemana. It detects some more malwares that the normal scan misses according to what I saw in the hub HMP: there are 4 engines so it is great. You can also enable EWS (early warning scoring). It's similar to NPE when this option is enabled but not as well-developed , IMO HMP is only bad at PUPs and fileless malwares. The rest is great thanks to BD and Kaspersky engines but BD engine has been weak for a few recent years at the end: I think NPE is a must-have scanner. We can ignore the rest but more is better [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top