Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
Windows Defender vs Ransomware! (Shocking Results?)
Message
<blockquote data-quote="monkeylove" data-source="post: 1082664" data-attributes="member: 19756"><p>You, I, and others have been done some time ago. The fact that you were not only coming up with shifting views of "good habits" you were even disagreeing with the point about default-deny proves my argument, as manual default-deny is what one has to do if one doesn't want to use advanced software.</p><p></p><p>I'm posting this so that others will see my points:</p><p></p><p>You start with "good habits" involving only visiting "safe" sites and using "safe" apps. And then news comes out of malware spreading from the same, and companies not realizing that they were infected before it was too late. So you now shift your definition to checking the same "safe" sites before accessing them and doing the same for the "safe" apps, and even delaying work by several days just to see if anyone else gets infected.</p><p></p><p>Meanwhile, someone else defines "bad habits" as being "click happy," but visiting "safe" sites and using "safe" apps aren't examples of that, and infection can still take place.</p><p></p><p>Still others now talk about using secondary scanners. What happened to the built-in one? Not "advanced" enough? This is in light of your point that advanced security apps increase vulnerabilities. It never occurred to you that the reason why they become advanced is because of increasing features added which increase those vulnerabilities.</p><p></p><p>Still more talk about letting users decide what to run by default and what to deny. Hopefully, BSODs or malfunctioning apps won't take place.</p><p></p><p>And all that to replace advanced security programs, which started with checking signatures in a database. When that was found not to be good enough, it used more features like checking against multiple databases, which is what happens when you check sites and apps against online scanners. From there, if nothing was detected, it used other features like looking for any incidences happening to others that also report to the cloud, and seeing what the app is doing or what's happening in the OS to see if anything is going wrong, and probably even deciding to let the app or browser run in a sandbox to see what happens. And so on.</p><p></p><p>But the average user can learn to do all those things by himself given "good habits", right?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="monkeylove, post: 1082664, member: 19756"] You, I, and others have been done some time ago. The fact that you were not only coming up with shifting views of "good habits" you were even disagreeing with the point about default-deny proves my argument, as manual default-deny is what one has to do if one doesn't want to use advanced software. I'm posting this so that others will see my points: You start with "good habits" involving only visiting "safe" sites and using "safe" apps. And then news comes out of malware spreading from the same, and companies not realizing that they were infected before it was too late. So you now shift your definition to checking the same "safe" sites before accessing them and doing the same for the "safe" apps, and even delaying work by several days just to see if anyone else gets infected. Meanwhile, someone else defines "bad habits" as being "click happy," but visiting "safe" sites and using "safe" apps aren't examples of that, and infection can still take place. Still others now talk about using secondary scanners. What happened to the built-in one? Not "advanced" enough? This is in light of your point that advanced security apps increase vulnerabilities. It never occurred to you that the reason why they become advanced is because of increasing features added which increase those vulnerabilities. Still more talk about letting users decide what to run by default and what to deny. Hopefully, BSODs or malfunctioning apps won't take place. And all that to replace advanced security programs, which started with checking signatures in a database. When that was found not to be good enough, it used more features like checking against multiple databases, which is what happens when you check sites and apps against online scanners. From there, if nothing was detected, it used other features like looking for any incidences happening to others that also report to the cloud, and seeing what the app is doing or what's happening in the OS to see if anything is going wrong, and probably even deciding to let the app or browser run in a sandbox to see what happens. And so on. But the average user can learn to do all those things by himself given "good habits", right? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top