Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Evjl&amp;#039;s Rain" data-source="post: 775779" data-attributes="member: 51905">I don&#039;t talk anout myself, I meant novice users who don&#039;t can/can&#039;t perform simple tasks other than opening their browsers, MS office,...for my voodooshield or any anti-exe are fully usable but for them, it almost unusable because they can&#039;t decide the safety of a file, because they don&#039;t have enough skills and because anti-exes are likely to block everything including truely safe files (newly downloaded from the internet)for them, anti-exe or any default-deny solutions cause more trouble than what to can solvethey can archive 99-100% protection but for novice users, they block everythingI don&#039;t mind about any fileless or scripting attacks because I block them all (vectors). They are not allowed to run in any computer I can touch, thanks to syshardener and some personal SRP tweaks. The only things these PCs have to deal with are .exe, .msi, phishing attacks =&gt; add strong phishing filters and file reputation checker (windows smartscreen, avast&#039;s hardened mode) so only safe and reputable files can run, of course they might miss a few but the chance is smallfor exploits, it&#039;s hard to prevent but I truely believe home users are unlikely to encounter targeted attacks, mostly bussiness environmentI always think HMPA is overrated because it actually can&#039;t prevent any attack when every script is blocked and it failed to block wannacry&#039;s exploit =&gt; they added this protection after the outbreak but kaspersky and ESET&#039;s exploit protections successfully blocked this exploitI have been studying via this forum for a few years and personal experience with many softwares. I create my own formula for security. I don&#039;t want 100% security, 50% usability but 95% security and 99% usabilityabout WD, I know if I use WD in any of my PC, they will 100% get infected because I know its weaknesses and how my family use computer</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Evjl's Rain, post: 775779, member: 51905"] I don't talk anout myself, I meant novice users who don't can/can't perform simple tasks other than opening their browsers, MS office,... for my voodooshield or any anti-exe are fully usable but for them, it almost unusable because they can't decide the safety of a file, because they don't have enough skills and because anti-exes are likely to block everything including truely safe files (newly downloaded from the internet) for them, anti-exe or any default-deny solutions cause more trouble than what to can solve they can archive 99-100% protection but for novice users, they block everything I don't mind about any fileless or scripting attacks because I block them all (vectors). They are not allowed to run in any computer I can touch, thanks to syshardener and some personal SRP tweaks. The only things these PCs have to deal with are .exe, .msi, phishing attacks => add strong phishing filters and file reputation checker (windows smartscreen, avast's hardened mode) so only safe and reputable files can run, of course they might miss a few but the chance is small for exploits, it's hard to prevent but I truely believe home users are unlikely to encounter targeted attacks, mostly bussiness environment I always think HMPA is overrated because it actually can't prevent any attack when every script is blocked and it failed to block wannacry's exploit => they added this protection after the outbreak but kaspersky and ESET's exploit protections successfully blocked this exploit I have been studying via this forum for a few years and personal experience with many softwares. I create my own formula for security. I don't want 100% security, 50% usability but 95% security and 99% usability about WD, I know if I use WD in any of my PC, they will 100% get infected because I know its weaknesses and how my family use computer [/QUOTE]

Verification