New Update VoodooShield CyberLock 7.0

[simmerskool]

You can absolutely do that, but who doesn't start looking thru the options after awhile, either out of curiosity or to try to understand the program a bit better? I believe that all the options/settings could be overwhelming for many if they start scrolling thru them.

Sure agree! I have some enterprise EDR here with cloud management portals, it can be overwhelming (for me -- not for Trident & Kongo). But I don't tell, eg, Checkpoint to dumb it down for me. Sure you can, and perhaps should, look thru CL features, do your best to understand, some will understand more, some less, isn't that why we post here? Nice thing about CL it works at default without tweaking anything in settings. IMO. (I am currently not running WLC with CL until past issue with another app is clarified).
PS other nice thing about VS/CL it never slowed down my computers. And I don't see any slowdown with Attach Chains and Windows Sandbox.

 

[Oldie1950]

Sure agree! I have some enterprise EDR here with cloud management portals, it can be overwhelming (for me -- not for Trident & Kongo). But I don't tell, eg, Checkpoint to dumb it down for me. Sure you can, and perhaps should, look thru CL features, do your best to understand, some will understand more, some less, isn't that why we post here? Nice thing about CL it works at default without tweaking anything in settings. IMO. (I am currently not running WLC with CL until past issue with another app is clarified).
PS other nice thing about VS/CL it never slowed down my computers. And I don't see any slowdown with Attach Chains and Windows Sandbox.

CyberLock is not designed as business software. Therefore, you cannot put it on the same level as Checkpoint’s EDR software. Dan claims that his software should also be usable for private users with little computer knowledge. It should therefore (this is of course just my opinion) have a clearer user interface. By this I expressly do not mean the “dumbing down” that you mentioned. Of course, all the functions required for a good effect should be present under the user interface. They just don't need to be visible in the many options in the current interface. When I drive a car, I don't want to constantly look into the engine compartment. I think it's really worth considering offering two versions with different user interfaces. One version for advanced users and another version for the common consumer.
I see you as an advanced user. So you probably have a different perspective than me.

 

[danb]

CL usability is dependent upon users not going into the settings or attempting to use features. Got it.

Correct. Software with the highest usability requires zero configuration. It works optimally for most or all users out of the box and does not require configuration of any kind.

 

[danb]

CyberLock is not designed as business software. Therefore, you cannot put it on the same level as Checkpoint’s EDR software. Dan claims that his software should also be usable for private users with little computer knowledge. It should therefore (this is of course just my opinion) have a clearer user interface. By this I expressly do not mean the “dumbing down” that you mentioned. Of course, all the functions required for a good effect should be present under the user interface. They just don't need to be visible in the many options in the current interface. When I drive a car, I don't want to constantly look into the engine compartment. I think it's really worth considering offering two versions with different user interfaces. One version for advanced users and another version for the common consumer.
I see you as an advanced user. So you probably have a different perspective than me.

CyberLock is absolutely designed as business software and to protect business endpoints.

Almost all CyberLock business users do not even realize that CyberLock has adjustable settings. All they see is a user-friendly toggling desktop shield gadget that is protecting them whenever they are about to click on something they are unsure of.

 

[simmerskool]

CyberLock is not designed as business software. Therefore, you cannot put it on the same level as Checkpoint’s EDR software. Dan claims that his software should also be usable for private users with little computer knowledge. It should therefore (this is of course just my opinion) have a clearer user interface. By this I expressly do not mean the “dumbing down” that you mentioned. Of course, all the functions required for a good effect should be present under the user interface. They just don't need to be visible in the many options in the current interface. When I drive a car, I don't want to constantly look into the engine compartment. I think it's really worth considering offering two versions with different user interfaces. One version for advanced users and another version for the common consumer.
I see you as an advanced user. So you probably have a different perspective than me.

Not "advanced" but I have used VS_now_CL for 10+ years. For the past 5 years, I rarely open the Settings. @rhythm had to tell me where to find something under UI Tweaks.

 

[Oldie1950]

I want to make one thing clear: it was not my intention to criticize the quality of Cyberlock. Dan is certainly a brilliant developer who has developed this product with a lot of commitment and is constantly developing it further. However, I mistakenly did not assume that it was business software. Therefore, it is not the right software for me as a private user. I'm curious and want to understand and use all the software options available. I'm overwhelmed with Cyberlock. Anyone who is happy with using software with the standard settings will certainly be happy with Cyberlock.
It was not my intention to start an ugly argument about cyberlock.

 

[ForgottenSeer 100397]

Based on my experience, most average users don't access or care about the GUI. I disagree that average users would have problems with the new features or settings. The new features, Attack Chains or Windows Sandbox, are primarily useful for advanced or WS users. The Attack Chains section is like the Command Lines section and may replace it.

In my experience, average users won't or don't use sandbox-like features. Default in CL should disable the Windows Sandbox feature, and the WS option should be unavailable on alerts.

CL can have an Expert/Simple Mode button at the bottom left. The button label will display either "simple" or "expert", depending on the current mode. In expert mode, CL will display advanced sections and options, such as attack chains or custom folders. In simple mode, CL will hide advanced sections and options, such as automatically allowing items that match a digital signature in the whitelist snapshot or automatically scanning the child processes of allowed parent processes.

 

[Acadia]

... Default in CL should disable the Windows Sandbox feature ...

I agree completely with that. My system is too complicated as it is without adding a major feature like that. Fact is, I have never had to do anything or "mess with" VoodooShield at all and I would like it to stay that way. So far it has been an excellent product ... if it ain't broke don't fix it ... too much
Acadia

 

[Freki123]

@danb Any chance to get the fp fixed?

Spoiler: Post 893

New Update - VoodooShield CyberLock 7.0

Thanks for the reply Dan, I only wished to make you aware of a possible risk so you could fix it and I'm sorry that Ultimate Vision didn't understand it. What could happen if a "average user" accidentally executes a malicious file (not the case of DocXV.exe) and Cyberlock doesn't alert him ?

malwaretips.com

c5e8b40ddc8a4d143903362bf0842913b16ecb001683396927056e4345ea56be
e0b6bf0db15d97d022ba527f6b98e8820a5a12721c4ed2d671d4a7b78e33b840
Legit bought game. CL has signature problems with it while VT says it's valid.

 

[simmerskool]

I want to make one thing clear: it was not my intention to criticize the quality of Cyberlock. Dan is certainly a brilliant developer who has developed this product with a lot of commitment and is constantly developing it further. However, I mistakenly did not assume that it was business software. Therefore, it is not the right software for me as a private user. I'm curious and want to understand and use all the software options available. I'm overwhelmed with Cyberlock. Anyone who is happy with using software with the standard settings will certainly be happy with Cyberlock.
It was not my intention to start an ugly argument about cyberlock.

yes, no need to ugly argument. I thought my posts about using CL at default while also liking its new features were not in any way nasty toward anyone, yet someone on staff deleted at least one of my posts. If I did come across as unfriendly, not my intent. It looked to like me new member gimmlee had only ever posted 3 times at MT all 3 in this thread and solely for the purpose of personally attacking the developer of VS/CL who started this thread. Often friendly differing opinions can be of significant value in my opinion, but not trolls.

 

[Oldie1950]

yes, no need to ugly argument. I thought my posts about using CL at default while also liking its new features were not in any way nasty toward anyone, yet someone on staff deleted at least one of my posts. If I did come across as unfriendly, not my intent. It looked to like me new member gimmlee had only ever posted 3 times at MT all 3 in this thread and solely for the purpose of personally attacking the developer of VS/CL who started this thread. Often friendly differing opinions can be of significant value in my opinion, but not trolls.

The “ugly” rating did not refer to your posts. This was more related to Gimmlee, who is probably Dan's long-known enemy.

 

[simmerskool]

@danb Any chance to get the fp fixed?

Spoiler: Post 893

New Update - VoodooShield CyberLock 7.0

Thanks for the reply Dan, I only wished to make you aware of a possible risk so you could fix it and I'm sorry that Ultimate Vision didn't understand it. What could happen if a "average user" accidentally executes a malicious file (not the case of DocXV.exe) and Cyberlock doesn't alert him ?

malwaretips.com

c5e8b40ddc8a4d143903362bf0842913b16ecb001683396927056e4345ea56be
e0b6bf0db15d97d022ba527f6b98e8820a5a12721c4ed2d671d4a7b78e33b840
Legit bought game. CL has signature problems with it while VT says it's valid.

Is it "suspicious" because of missing signature, or VAi analysis, or WLC not safe (meaning it is not in WLC database yet??)

 

[simmerskool]

The “ugly” rating did not refer to your posts. This was more related to Gimmlee, who is probably Dan's long-known enemy.

but one (or more?) of my posts was deleted! Thanks for posting it was not my post(s).!! (you & I merely disagreed about CL new features)

 

[Freki123]

Is it "suspicious" because of missing signature, or VAi analysis, or WLC not safe (meaning it is not in WLC database yet??)

WLC and CLAi say it's safe (pics in the spoiler from the post above), end result "Not safe". For some reason CL doesn't like the signature where VT says it's a valid signature.

 

[simmerskool]

WLC and CLAi say it's safe (pics in the spoiler from the post above), end result "Not safe". For some reason CL doesn't like the signature where VT says it's a valid signature.

I get so few popups I that I perhaps forget VS nuances: if VAi= safe, WLC= safe, VirusTotal= clean w/ valid signature, then I think there is a place in CL where user can "allow" &/or mark file false+. Support can still check the file or if needed your logs, and perhaps more analysis with Attack Chains (we're waiting for further explanatory development with that as well as Windows Sandbox), and you should be able to move forward with witcher3 if you are comfortable, while Support does further analysis if needed. IMO CL alerts should be investigated, but as someone says here, don't be paranoid.

 

[Freki123]

@simmerskool Thanks for the post I wasn't worried about it being unsafe.
I just hoped for a CL fp fix since WLC, AI and VT considered it safe. Fun fact CL shows for those two files no "report fp" button. I looked twice there is none (Normally there is one but not for these files). Anyways back to playing games and thanks for the help.

 

[simmerskool]

@simmerskool Thanks for the post I wasn't worried about it being unsafe.
I just hoped for a CL fp fix since WLC, AI and VT considered it safe. Fun fact CL shows for those two files no "report fp" button. I looked twice there is none (Normally there is one but not for these files). Anyways back to playing games and thanks for the help.

CL Support has always (usually) been fast good & thorough, imo.

 

[danb]

Hey Guys,

Merry Christmas! Here is the latest version of CyberLock with the Windows Sandbox integration. It is pretty much complete, but please let me know if anything is not quite right. We also need to add a button or something to automatically enable Windows Sandbox to make it even easier for users.

There are essentially 3 different components to the CyberLock Windows Sandbox integration.
1) Blocked or scanned items can be executed in the sandbox:

Simply click the Sandbox button in CyberLock and the file will be executed in the sandbox.

2) Email client links can be executed in the sandbox:

A significant portion of malware originates from email links, so now you can choose to open email client links in the sandbox or your default browser. There is a new option in CyberLock Settings / UI Tweaks tab that is called “Launch email client links in Protected Windows Sandbox”. If this option is enabled, you can choose between Ask or On. The Ask option will ask if you want to open the link in the sandbox or your default browser (see screenshot below). The On option will open all email links in the sandbox. I personally like the Ask option and it is much more seamless and user-friendly than I thought it was going to be. If there are any links that do not open properly, please send me a copy of the email and I will fix the issue. Or if there are any email clients where this feature is not working, please let me know. I know it works well for Outlook because I have been using it quite a bit the last few days, but I have not tested other email clients yet.

3) CyberLock Safe Browser:

This feature will open a sandbox instance that is further hardened than the default Windows Sandbox, and it will open Microsoft Edge with Google as the homepage. There are a lot of really cool things we can do to build this feature out some more. But the idea is to have quick access to a disposable browser in case you need to do something that might be a little dangerous on the web. There is a shortcut to the CyberLock Safe Browser in C:\Program Files\CyberLock, I have not put it on the desktop because not all users are going to have Windows Sandbox enabled, and I do not like it when developers clutter my desktop with useless icons.

BTW, the new options are not translated into the various languages yet. I always like to finalize the verbiage before completing the translations. For example, can anyone think of a better term to use on the CyberLock User Prompt Sandbox button? I was thinking something like “Test first” or “Open Protected”. The goal is to make the wording so that everyone understands them, because a lot of people do not know what a sandbox is.

This version should be perfectly stable and should not be considered a beta.

CyberLock 7.65

https://cyberlock.global/Download/InstallCyberLock765.exe

SHA-256: 4051a03326867e157f519ab213f67761c576b66d5303ae6dae022fa2266978f2


Have a great Christmas, thank you guys!

Dan

 

[Dave Russo]

Really nice option Thanks, looking forward to give it a try on some shady e- mail

 

[Dave Russo]

I put the e-mail option on but did not see anything but got a pop up from Kaspersky blocking it(are you able when possible to shows this in action in a video? Thanks, also set up I guess send me a letter with your PayPal address and I will make a contribution if you want