Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Andy Ful" data-source="post: 824952" data-attributes="member: 32260">[USER=77647]@davisd[/USER],Your post was not necessary and only bloats the thread. You simply repeat arguments which were presented already by Opcode. Furthermore, I agree with Opcode with everything about behavior blocking, which you did not notice. I only do not see any evidence for saying that Advanced Heuristics, Sandboxing and some other AV modules which are based on behavior monitoring/blocking could belong to the category &quot;Behavior Blocker&quot;. Of course, they could belong If most AV related industry would agree on such a meaning.It is true that the name &quot;Behavior Blocker&quot; comes from behavior blocking. But, this does not prove that &#039;Behavior Blocker&#039; is an equivalent of AV module based on &#039;behavior blocking&#039;. This argument is not convincing even on the ground of semantics, and I already showed the counterarguments in my previous post:&quot;Edit2.The language argument should not be used in the thread on AV protection.By the way, it is not valid. For example, from the fact that one can think, it does not follow that she/he must be a thinker or similarly from the fact that one can drink it does not follow that she/he is a drinker. &quot;This thread is not for fighting and pushing personal opinions. Please read again my post:[URL unfurl=&quot;false&quot;]https://malwaretips.com/threads/what-behavior-blocker-is-and-what-it-is-not.93785/post-824873[/URL]Be safe.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Andy Ful, post: 824952, member: 32260"] [USER=77647]@davisd[/USER], Your post was not necessary and only bloats the thread. You simply repeat arguments which were presented already by Opcode. Furthermore, [COLOR=rgb(184, 49, 47)][B][SIZE=4]I agree with Opcode with everything about behavior blocking[/SIZE][/B][/COLOR], which you did not notice. I only do not see any evidence for saying that Advanced Heuristics, Sandboxing and some other AV modules which are based on behavior monitoring/blocking could belong to the category "Behavior Blocker". Of course, they could belong If most AV related industry would agree on such a meaning. It is true that the name "Behavior Blocker" comes from behavior blocking. But, this does not prove that 'Behavior Blocker' is an equivalent of AV module based on 'behavior blocking'. This argument is not convincing even on the ground of semantics, and I already showed the counterarguments in my previous post: "[I]Edit2. The language argument should not be used in the thread on AV protection. By the way, it is not valid. For example, from the fact that one can think, it does not follow that she/he must be a thinker or similarly from the fact that one can drink it does not follow that she/he is a drinker. [/I]" This thread is not for fighting and pushing personal opinions. Please read again my post: [URL unfurl="false"]https://malwaretips.com/threads/what-behavior-blocker-is-and-what-it-is-not.93785/post-824873[/URL] Be safe. [/QUOTE]

Verification