Webroot and a talkative virus

  • This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

shmu26

Level 57
Jul 3, 2015
4,674
14,876
Operating System
Windows 10
Installed Antivirus
Microsoft
#41
The truth is Webroot just isn't very good protection without supplementing it with other security softs - like AppGuard, NVT ERP, VooDooShield, Windows Firewall Control, etc.
I am presently using WSA on win 10. I was convinced into giving it another try because of a rave review I just saw on pcmag
Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus (2016)
but after reading this thread, I suspect that their rave review might be more revelant to win 7 than to win 10.
Can you recommend a good firewall supplement for an amateur like myself?
I have tried comodo but got frustrated by the bugs and the tendency to forget rules.
Voodooshield is a great idea in theory, but it kept throwing up alerts for me, without giving me enough info to make an intelligent decision, so I got frustrated by that, too.
But what about Windows Firewall Control? Is that a good solution for me?
I also have Spyshelter free running on my system, set for medium security. Maybe that's enough?

edit: I tried out windows firewall control on medium security (recommended setting) but it blocks everything under the sun. chrome, dropbox, you name it. that's too much for me.
 
Last edited:
Feb 14, 2016
461
1,591
Operating System
Windows 10
Installed Antivirus
Avast
#42
I am presently using WSA on win 10. I was convinced into giving it another try because of a rave review I just saw on pcmag
Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus (2016)
but after reading this thread, I suspect that their rave review might be more revelant to win 7 than to win 10.
Can you recommend a good firewall supplement for an amateur like myself?
I have tried comodo but got frustrated by the bugs and the tendency to forget rules.
Voodooshield is a great idea in theory, but it kept throwing up alerts for me, without giving me enough info to make an intelligent decision, so I got frustrated by that, too.
But what about Windows Firewall Control? Is that a good solution for me?
I also have Spyshelter free running on my system, set for medium security. Maybe that's enough?
Zone alarm free firewall is a ecellent choice for a amateur. not much popups like from other firewall/comodo/ private firewall with its hips modules. If u want to use the win build in firewall u can test windows firewall control or tinywall.
 

shmu26

Level 57
Jul 3, 2015
4,674
14,876
Operating System
Windows 10
Installed Antivirus
Microsoft
#43
Zone alarm free firewall is a ecellent choice for a amateur. not much popups like from other firewall/comodo/ private firewall with its hips modules. If u want to use the win build in firewall u can test windows firewall control or tinywall.
what does zonealarm firewall do for you, that windows firewall is not doing already?
 
H

hjlbx

Guest
#44
"It doesn't expose any settings in the Registry."

This is not completely accurate; program rules and active threat settings are made in the registry. A malware coder and use a scripting technique to have the script run with highest privileges, monitor for its malicious keys, and auto-delete them from Webroot sections of the registry. It won't disable Webroot, but it will delete rules and monitoring from the GUI.

"even though the antivirus testing labs mostly can't handle it."

This is not an accurate statement. Webroot is a default-allow protection model for any programs not initially detected as malicious. Most other AVs use default-deny in varying degrees. Webroot's protection model is contrary to standard industry practice for AVs. Sometimes the journaling and rollback works very well, other times it does not.

* * * * *

The bottom line is that Webroot should be bolstered with an anti-executable - like NVT ERP or VooDooShield - for stronger security.

The protection to resource consumption ratio is HUGE - so, in my opinion - Webroot is great in this regard. AV is a waste of system resources, so that is why I use Webroot when I want to use an AV scan engine on a system.

If Webroot used 300 MB RAM with 1.5 GB install like Bitdefender, I don't think PCMag would rank it as high as it always has. A big part of the ranking is based upon the fact that Webroot uses essentially no resources.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Umbra

Level 61
Content Creator
Verified
May 16, 2011
17,486
30,739
Operating System
Windows 10
Installed Antivirus
Default-Deny
#45
The main reason reason i use Webroot is indeed its lightest footprint on the system plus its decent privacy features; i leave the proactive protection to my anti-exe/isolation softs.
 

shmu26

Level 57
Jul 3, 2015
4,674
14,876
Operating System
Windows 10
Installed Antivirus
Microsoft
#46
if my alternative is WD and WF, may I assume that the protection with WSA is going to be better, even on windows 10?
 

cLcL

Level 1
Jan 6, 2015
30
49
#48
in case some people didnt know, Webroot has working firewall now in Win10, and it's working fine (pop-ups, allow and block settings).
doesnt have notice-able impact to system (i use 2011's netbook, 2gB ram, Win10 x64 :D ), so i guess it use windows firewall.
 
Jul 15, 2015
2
3
#50
Since I read the report from AVlab I got a bit disappointed with WSA, that is if AVlab did understand the rollback feature that is.
But I guess they did, or Webroot would probably be all over them denying the results.
In the report they got infected more then other respected brands.

https://avlab.pl/sites/default/files/68files/ENG_2016_ransomware.pdf

/W
I do not think they took any rollback or sandbox reset into account, based on the second paragraph on page 12:

Moreover, for a long time we thought about whether to add an extra category of
evaluation: restoring file after crypto-ransomware attack. After careful inspection, it
turned out, that it would be unjust towards all tested software — for one reason:
Arcabit Internet Security would receive overwhelming advantage, which doesn’t
reflect the true picture of mechanisms available in other suites with default settings.

I read that as meaning a file restore would be a rollback of any kind, whether from Webroot, Arcabit, Comodo, etc. They even say it does not reflect the "true picture of mechanisms" of all of the AV suites. In my opinion, if encrypted files can be restored by the suite, it should be a pass. Only of the files cannot be restored by the suite should it be a fail.