VoodooShield CyberLock 7.0
- Thread starter danb
- Start date
- Mar 30, 2022
- 288
- Oct 14, 2016
- 202
Installed over v7.42 without issue. Pro licence automatically carried across.
- Jan 26, 2020
- 1,628
What is the main advantage of having voodooshield running beside for e.g. Eset Smart Security Premium? Isnt that too much? I don't know much on this but thought to ask. Thankkyou.
- Jan 27, 2018
- 1,410
Basically VS would just provide a secondary layer of protection, I don't think it's too much unless your using some other program as well, some may disagree. Usually VS runs well alongside other AV's.
Might depend on what settings you are using on ESET.
If you enabled interactive HIPS or make some changes that increases the number of alerts ESET gives you, then on those scenarios having VoodooShield could be consider “too much”
- Jan 26, 2020
- 1,628
No, I never mess with default settings in the ESET in regard to HIPS. The same about increases the number of alerts ESET gives me. I think you mean the Advanced Settings>Detection engine section where you can set ESET to alerts?
The section above you mean ? Also, HIPS setting is set to Automatic mode. Which mode, do you personally recommend? Thank you.
- Mar 29, 2018
- 7,613
Last edited:
Automatic or Smart.
If you don’t mind having lots of alerts, then you can try interactive. However it might be for the best to leave it on learning mode for a couple of hours before using interactive mode.
- Jan 26, 2020
- 1,628
Yes, I also noticed that Automatic mode is best for me, then I will install voodooshield.
- Mar 29, 2018
- 7,613
It will always be VoodooShield here, AFAIC.Maybe @danb can make a new sub-forum for CyberLock. How about it?
- Apr 24, 2016
- 7,256
- Jan 27, 2018
- 1,410
Seeing it's basically the same product with the same settings and issues etc, why not just change the title of this thread? Voodoo Shield Cyberlock.
- Feb 26, 2021
- 949
@danb, I did notice a couple more things:
1. If I already have an allow firewall rule and that app gets updated Cyberlock will create a new block rule (because the update is initially seen as unsafe because the hashes are too new), that Cyberlock created block rule will take priority over any allow rule. Since Windows Firewall doesn't use hashes there's no way of distinguishing between the rules. That's not good. I recently began having rclone issues and I could see why, and my configurartion remained the same. Cyberlock created a block rule for it. Would it be possible to not create a block rule if there is already a rule created for that .exe?
2. I assume with this re-branding you want everything to say Cyberlock now and not VoodooShield. However, the application icons (tray, desktop shield, etc.) still say "VS."
3. When I try and do a manual update check within Cyberlock, I get the below message saying I have no internet connection, although I clearly do. I also have no firewall rule blocking cyberlock.
1. If I already have an allow firewall rule and that app gets updated Cyberlock will create a new block rule (because the update is initially seen as unsafe because the hashes are too new), that Cyberlock created block rule will take priority over any allow rule. Since Windows Firewall doesn't use hashes there's no way of distinguishing between the rules. That's not good. I recently began having rclone issues and I could see why, and my configurartion remained the same. Cyberlock created a block rule for it. Would it be possible to not create a block rule if there is already a rule created for that .exe?
2. I assume with this re-branding you want everything to say Cyberlock now and not VoodooShield. However, the application icons (tray, desktop shield, etc.) still say "VS."
3. When I try and do a manual update check within Cyberlock, I get the below message saying I have no internet connection, although I clearly do. I also have no firewall rule blocking cyberlock.
- Jan 27, 2018
- 1,410
fyi, I do not get that update issue when checking for an update.
Similar threads
