i guess he meant : Emsisoft (COMA HERE), WFC and H_C
What's good about Emsisoft?
- Thread starter notabot
- Start date
Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.
- Jul 6, 2017
- 2,392
I'm certainly missing the coma.:emoji_flushed:i guess he meant : Emsisoft (COMA HERE), WFC and H_C
Not much I can add other than agree with all the great points about Emsisoft. They are one of my top favorite companies and will remain that way because they have the best customer service IMO, they offer excellent protection, their top priority is privacy at all costs, etc... I also like the fact that when they design and implement something, they do it by ensuring they follow documented processes, which will lead to less issues, especially when Windows is updated. I know MS deserves a lot of blame for some of these things, but 3rd parties do cause their own problems, despite what some many think. Doing your own thing will always create the potential for things to go wrong. Take HTTPS scanning for example, it was always designed to be a secure connection between you and the server with no one in between (both good and bad). If anyone should know better, its security companies, but no, they take it upon themselves to "check" everything because they "know" better and as a result it has led to many issues because they feel like they "NEED" to scan the traffic.
Personally I think a lot of companies can learn from the great work Emsisoft is doing. It's not always about having 10000 features and adding a bunch of useless stuff that most people use other products for (many of which do a better job, ie: password manager).
Agreed.
If anything I would argue that the vast majority of "average" users probably have far simpler setups compared to most security geeks. These tools have been and are designed for more IT pros and security geeks. The average person probably has never herd of, nor ever will hear about these programs. All they want is an all in one solution that doesn't get in their way. The more it gets in their way, the higher chance of them either disabling it, or uninstalling it. More is not always better and it's only the fear and paranoia that creates these overkill setups. There are a lot of advanced attacks out there, most of which probably won't ever hit people at home. Take WD for example, sure there are some pretty advanced attacks to get around it (especially when tweaked) and the protections built into Windows, but lets be honest, even though some of these things are possible, it doesn't mean that people at home would be subject to these things. It's this type of fear and paranoia that creates overkill setups.
I think as security geeks we are all there are one point, or another, but eventually we come around and realize how much we are overthinking it. I try my best to keep my setup as simple and effective as possible. I am not searching for 100% protection, I just want effective protection that doesn't annoy me and doesn't get in my way. The other piece to all of this, is education. This is the most important part IMO and it's often forgotten. Practicing safe habits will keep you safe more than some may think. I know teaching average users may seem daunting at times, but you don't know until you try. Trying to use a security program(s) as a replacement for education will only work for so long, as well all know nothing is ever perfect and eventually something will get by.
Personally I think a lot of companies can learn from the great work Emsisoft is doing. It's not always about having 10000 features and adding a bunch of useless stuff that most people use other products for (many of which do a better job, ie: password manager).
Agreed.
If anything I would argue that the vast majority of "average" users probably have far simpler setups compared to most security geeks. These tools have been and are designed for more IT pros and security geeks. The average person probably has never herd of, nor ever will hear about these programs. All they want is an all in one solution that doesn't get in their way. The more it gets in their way, the higher chance of them either disabling it, or uninstalling it. More is not always better and it's only the fear and paranoia that creates these overkill setups. There are a lot of advanced attacks out there, most of which probably won't ever hit people at home. Take WD for example, sure there are some pretty advanced attacks to get around it (especially when tweaked) and the protections built into Windows, but lets be honest, even though some of these things are possible, it doesn't mean that people at home would be subject to these things. It's this type of fear and paranoia that creates overkill setups.
I think as security geeks we are all there are one point, or another, but eventually we come around and realize how much we are overthinking it. I try my best to keep my setup as simple and effective as possible. I am not searching for 100% protection, I just want effective protection that doesn't annoy me and doesn't get in my way. The other piece to all of this, is education. This is the most important part IMO and it's often forgotten. Practicing safe habits will keep you safe more than some may think. I know teaching average users may seem daunting at times, but you don't know until you try. Trying to use a security program(s) as a replacement for education will only work for so long, as well all know nothing is ever perfect and eventually something will get by.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not saying Win10 has plenty of security features doing exactly the same you find on suites or standalone tools. Sure the way MS implemented them is atrocious, but for us "geeks" it isn't much a problem, just a bit more clicking to do.
So far everything sounds good - Is Emsisoft lightweight in terms of resource consumption ?
- Sep 5, 2017
- 1,173
WD for all of its strengths is actually kind of slow when you trigger its high caution scans. The cloud lookup of an executable after downloading it sometimes takes 1-2 seconds while an offline engine like Emsisoft can do it in milliseconds.
the downside is that BD based engines can use more RAM to reduce the CPU overhead of scanning — on the order of 500MB to 1GB. You can configure it to use less but that’s not recommended unless you are starved on RAM. These days most computers come with much more RAM than your average workloads need, so using RAM to reduce CPU overhead is definitely the right call.
I actually do what Umbra says - either you trust VS, or you don't. So I run a highly private, very basic AV (no cloud, no uploads, disabled logging, good sigs) along with VoodooShield 5.03b on AlwaysOn/Aggressive and call it a day.
Now that VS will be implementing WhitelistCloud into it (which it has in the version I am running), and allegedly Dan has removed VT from it and replaced it with WLC, false positives are rare, and it will also stop outbound connectivity on malicious/suspect applications. I'd be pretty confident running VS 5.03+ (WLC integrated) as the sole security solution these days. But I still like to have some alternate sig based AV on my boxes. (for now, doubtful I will renew)
I'd look at Emsisoft again someday if they nixed Bit Defender sigs and either went with their own, or preferably Ikarus or something. Also I am hesitant to buy suites that don't at least have their own good quality firewall for people I install suites for. So I usually grab BD, Panda Advanced or Norton (whichever has the best deal at time of renewal) for family and friends as I like those third party firewalls I can tweak up.
Last edited by a moderator:
Whitelist Cloud (or someyhing like that), it is opposite to blacklisting (what classic AVs do), from what i heard, VS will have all the legit files listed and if you run a file that isn't in this list it will be flagged.
Kind of what does PCmatic.
Theoretically it is not a bad mechanism but the workload to maintain such list will be huge and at beginning will generate have lot of FPs . Especially from people using low-reputation apps.
Last edited by a moderator:
That's not a bad idea. For the average user though I think configuring something like Norton SONAR to operate in the more prompting mode (forgot the exact name) might be the friendlier way of achieving that.
I'd still be worried that things like fresh new software updates (Firefox, Chrome, Windows Update) might be problem spots for a whitelist system but would be curious to test it out.
- May 17, 2015
- 714
Configure SONAR Advanced Mode
To block high-certainty threats, and receive notifications for low-certainty threats with few suspicious characteristics, move the switch to Aggressive.
This setting is highly sensitive and might cause legitimate files to be identified as threats. It is recommended for advanced users only.
- Nov 17, 2016
- 1,242
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,592
The second setup probably wins (only on Windows 10) against malware you will never encounter.
The first probably wins to avoid the false positives you will hardly see on your computer.
Emsisoft has much better support (and some other advantages), so it is worth its price if such support is required.
Emsisoft has much better offline protection.
WD is free and Windows built-in, which can be important for some people.
Last edited:
- Apr 19, 2017
- 249
The good thing about default deny is I'm 100% sure my computer don't have any virus so I don't have to waste 30 min ~ 1 hour every month scanning my computer with EEK, Malwarebytes and HitmanPro.The second setup probably wins (only on Windows 10) against malware you will never encounter.
The first probably wins to avoid the false positives you will hardly see on your computer
Emsisoft has much better support (and some other advantages), so it is worth its price if such support is required.
Emsisoft has much better offline protection.
WD is free and Windows built-in, which can be important for some people.
Edit: About Emsisoft, it is a good antivirus without useless features like VPN, Password Manager and PC Tuneup.
divinenews
Level 1
- Jun 26, 2012
- 27
For many years, my wife and I could not escape getting infections from malware on our mutual computers using various high rated software. She finally got fed up with us having to reformat our machines 2 or 3 times a year from these infections. So, in 2014, she demanded that I research the internet until I found an answer if there was one. ... What I found was Emsisoft Antimalware. We have not had an infection from any kind of malware since then.
I hear some people saying other apps are better, but why give up what has been time proven to you? ... And, she is very happy.
If you buy on Black Friday, as we do, the price is very low. This year we only paid $25 for 3 computers. We use the Google Chrome browser as our main browser and Firefox as our backup so we add Emsisoft's extensions to both of them.
As far as posting lab testing and scoring, I found this Link.
This year I won a lifetime license of Malwarebytes Premium and a three-year license for VoodooShield Pro, so I added the Malwarebytes to my wife's machine and the VoodooShield to mine. They both work very well with Emsisoft. Total compatibility. ... I think if I did not use Emsisoft as my main defense, I would use Bitdefender because of the reviews I have read.
I wanted to say that this is my life experience with safe surfing. I hope it helps someone who is searching for such information.
Thank you for listening,
divinenews,
aka Elijah Gale
I hear some people saying other apps are better, but why give up what has been time proven to you? ... And, she is very happy.
If you buy on Black Friday, as we do, the price is very low. This year we only paid $25 for 3 computers. We use the Google Chrome browser as our main browser and Firefox as our backup so we add Emsisoft's extensions to both of them.
As far as posting lab testing and scoring, I found this Link.
This year I won a lifetime license of Malwarebytes Premium and a three-year license for VoodooShield Pro, so I added the Malwarebytes to my wife's machine and the VoodooShield to mine. They both work very well with Emsisoft. Total compatibility. ... I think if I did not use Emsisoft as my main defense, I would use Bitdefender because of the reviews I have read.
I wanted to say that this is my life experience with safe surfing. I hope it helps someone who is searching for such information.
Thank you for listening,
divinenews,
aka Elijah Gale
- Sep 5, 2017
- 1,173
i am using also Emsisoft + Vodoosheild free which i can say light and good setup
just added fresh phishing and malware host file manually to for improving surf protection
and Tinywall for creating windows firewall rules
just added fresh phishing and malware host file manually to for improving surf protection
and Tinywall for creating windows firewall rules
divinenews
Level 1
- Jun 26, 2012
- 27
I just read that Tinywall is very good and I want to use it, but I also read this LINK :
(Excerpt)
"Tiny Firewall by Tiny Software Inc. is one of the most challenging firewall programs to customize. If you run Tiny Firewall with the default settings only, however, you'll receive the protection you need to block most intruders and hackers. But if you want to take advantage of Tiny Firewall's power, you'll need to invest time and patience to learn how."
DDE_Server can you give me any tips about how you configured Tinywall to get the best results/outcome?
Thank you kindly for your help.
