VoodooShield discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gdant said:
yeah, but even for paranoid, AV with good protection is enough.. I have seen that for some recent threats, it is not detected by any AV, secondary scanner and by VT so in this case with such huge protection, we are not safe.
Click to expand...
You see, you are also unconsciously paranoid, a security forum disease ;)

Now do you think you will encounter those kind of threats very often by using safe habits? and even if you encounter them, do you believe you will run them blindly?
 
  • Like
Reactions: _CyberGhosT_, BugCode, harlan4096 and 1 other person
Umbra said:
You see, you are also unconsciously paranoid, a security forum disease ;)

Now do you think you will encounter those kind of threats very often by using safe habits? and even if you encounter them, do you believe you will run them blindly?
Click to expand...
no I will not encounter threats so regular but I just gave an example..And that's why even signature is enough since malwares takes some time to spread and AV gets updates.
I have i5 notebook with 8 gb ram and I haven't even installed any AV (even windows defender is off) for 3 months and haven't get infected till now even with daily random surfing and unknown software downloads. Though, I use shadow defender sometimes for checking some software installation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solarquest, BugCode and harlan4096
Umbra said:
You are in a security forum where paranoia is the air we breath :D
Look; in some forums, when i mention that people can stay safe just by using Windows native security and safe habits, i get attacked by some paranoids FUD-dealers.
Click to expand...
You can probably stay safe with less but empirical evidence is lacking since there's no real incentive to research unless it's some vague statistics of how many people are infected every day.
@Solarquest Do Emsisoft and VoodooShield even touch the same market? VS slows down then asks the execution of weird exes I have. Comodo on the other hand instantly autosandboxes them. VoodooShield probably do upload them, well at least in certain cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solarquest
I see some users have concerns, VS uploads files or not, uploads files in some cases, etc... And if VS sends private or personally identifiable stuffs in any way...

I have PM Dev the concerns & will update here his reply.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: frogboy, Rengar, Solarquest and 3 others
_CyberGhosT_ said:
They run together just fine, I have run them as a duo often. So the suggestion was not
necessary in the first place, nor was sharing his opinion he shared with you on VS here ;)
Click to expand...
Why?
I suggested it because Emsi/Bitdefender is not having the best static detection on new samples(since some time now, at least here in the hub), doesn't scan new files on VT (VS is one of few programs that still can), doesn't have AI (but BB), has not a whitelist/anti-exe module etc...
I just suggested to add/implement VS (or some parts) in Emsi to improve its detection capability (and to prevent other AV from doing it before).
Everything can be discussed, everyone has different opinions.
Since it was suggested and discussed on Emsi forum (so publicly), why shouldn't I suggest it there or check here if VS is really a privacy concern?;)
Imagine Emsi +"VS in smart mode" or something similar...I would like it....
 
  • Like
Reactions: _CyberGhosT_ and Gdant
Honestly, I have several programs for different layers of protection. I would love to have one program, also because in the event of a software bug, separate programs allow me to maintain a certain level of security.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _CyberGhosT_
This is what Dan had to say on the subject:
QUOTE
New I have had several requests to respond to the following post.

VoodooShield discussion

My best advice is to stop worrying that companies that are trying to protect you, are spying on you. We use the absolute bare minimum of information that is required to sufficiently protect our users.

The reason for the 100mb file size limit in VS is simply because those files / hashes do not exist on the blacklist service… so there is no reason to even check. Why burden the servers with a request from a file that is too large to even be on the server?

Besides, think about how long it would take to upload a 100mb file, while noticing that VS returns the results and displays the user prompt within a second or so… a file of that size could not possibly have uploaded in that amount of time. The same logic applies to VoodooAi… it does not upload the actual file either.

If you do not want to use a certain feature in VS, simply disable that particular feature.
END
Source: VoodooShield ?

Could not agree more. ;)

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SHvFl, Solarquest, tonibalas and 5 others
I would like to add that, what VT does with any data from any software that utilizes VT's system
is on VT after that, and should be taken up with VirusTotal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHvFl
SHvFl said:
It makes no sense for Emsisoft to buy and combine VS. VS has limited use when using Emsisoft and their whole protection mindset it is completely different. Emsisoft wants everything to run as long as it doesn't do anything malicious while VS wants everything to get blocked pre-execution.
It's a totally different philosophy so even if adding VS was free for them they probably wouldn't do it.
Click to expand...
You are right but mindset can be updated/changed.
I saw not best static detection and cases where malware was in memory and BB was monitoring it but not blocking it (according to Emsi it might be because it wasn't doing anything malicious or for because of my test system...).
I thought VS could help Emsi in both areas.
Imagine both together (somehow).
You install it on a system, Emsi scans it, if clean VS part will create it's whitelist.
Old programs will not be checked on VT, only new ones.
User starts a new program, VS part checks VT. File has 0 detections, it runs and user still has Emsi BB as defence. File is detected on VT user gets an alert and decides (VT+AI infos).
Many more MW would be detected...As said, it's just an idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Der.Reisende, _CyberGhosT_ and SHvFl
Solarquest said:
You are right but mindset can be updated/changed.
I saw not best static detection and cases where malware was in memory and BB was monitoring it but not blocking it (according to Emsi it might be because it wasn't doing anything malicious or for because of my test system...).
I thought VS could help Emsi in both areas.
Imagine both together (somehow).
You install it on a system, Emsi scans it, if clean VS part will create it's whitelist.
Old programs will not be checked on VT, only new ones.
User starts a new program, VS part checks VT. File has 0 detections, it runs and user still has Emsi BB as defence. File is detected on VT user gets an alert and decides (VT+AI infos).
Many more MW would be detected...As said, it's just an idea.
Click to expand...
I see your point, but you can run to two side by side on a system and get
damn near the same result. EAM & VS run very well on the same machine and
I imagine it would be the same for EIS, although I can't confirm this as I stopped
running suites a long time ago. Try VS with EAM and see how smooth it is Solar ;)
I have and if I go back to using sig based, that is the combo I am going to run
with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Der.Reisende and Solarquest
I'm using both since a long time and never had a problem that's why I suggested to add Vs to Emsi, also before another AV does it (then no more Emsi+VS);)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Der.Reisende and _CyberGhosT_
TheMalwareMaster said:
Any hope of having Dan back on these forums? I knew he got banned for some reason, but I believe it would be by far easier to have him writing here instead of quoting each time the Wilders post
Click to expand...

That's true. But Dan is very busy buddy & when he work on his product and wrote "update" status and bug fixes in MT's neighbour and take there's the bug messages and working on those. Well, i quess he still stalking here in MT ;) But i have contacted him in neigbour and directly on email, works smoothly if has some private discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and frogboy
BugCode said:
That's true. But Dan is very busy buddy & when he work on his product and wrote "update" status and bug fixes in MT's neighbour and take there's the bug messages and working on those. Well, i quess he still stalking here in MT ;) But i have contacted him in neigbour and directly on email, works smoothly if has some private discussion.
Click to expand...
Yeah, of course he reads posts on here. He often replies to us (MalwareTips) in the other forum. Yeah, he replied me about the Archives problem in the past
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo, _CyberGhosT_, Solarquest and 2 others
I found it heavy in version 3.56 so i uninstalled it will try this version. Thks
I have comodo fw 10 installed is installing Vs 3.58 too much with comodo or should I uninstall Comodo FW 10 and use Vs?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and shmu26
it's weird that i haven't gotten an update from 3.53, although these updates are all betas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo
Status
Not open for further replies.

You may also like...