WinPatrol WAR (formally WinAntiRansom)

[hjlbx]

But more seriously... this is why I opt for SRP default-deny.

• I clean install OS (system is clean)
• I install wanted softs (system is still clean)
• I install SRP and lock down system (system is locked into clean state)
• I do not introduce unknown\untrusted stuff to system
  
• Everything that isn't allowed, is denied - with no reliance upon AV signatures, Authenticode, file reputation, HIPS, behavior blocker, Ai, etc, etc
  
• What is allowed, but vulnerable, is restricted to Standard User access rights

I don't have to think about anything
I don't have to guess
I dont' have to flip a coin

However, even though that is all good and dandy, network security remains a huge security risk with its many vulnerabilities along the whole transmission chain.

 

[hjlbx]

Hmm.. Since WAR evolve to kinda of a full-fledge AM-kind, then where does WinPatrol stand? Is it going to merge with WAR?

WinPatrol is a pseudo-HIPS; it shows creation of new services, Active-X components, auto-runs, etc on system.

WinAntiRansom is an anti-executable (which is a specific type of HIPS)\whitelisting soft; it blocks execution, provides user to allow\block, etc. It also has WinPrivacy integrated into it with anti-fingerprinting and Flash cookies.

WinAntiRansom + WinPatrol + decent adblocker is very solid physical system protection.

I suspect Bret will not combine WinPatrol and WinAntiRansom - but of course anything is possible. If most of his user\subsciber-base asked for them to be integrated then he would probably do it.

 

[Overkill]

WinAntiMalware
W.A.M , and they could have Greoge Michaels write them a new jingle, roflmao
I wrote that like 3 min ago, it took that long to quit laughing so I could see to hit enter.

 

[Rod McCarthy]

But more seriously... this is why I opt for SRP default-deny.

• I clean install OS (system is clean)
• I install wanted softs (system is still clean)
• I install SRP and lock down system (system is locked into clean state)
• I do not introduce unknown\untrusted stuff to system
  
• Everything that isn't allowed, is denied - with no reliance upon AV signatures, Authenticode, file reputation, HIPS, behavior blocker, Ai, etc, etc
  
• What is allowed, but vulnerable, is restricted to Standard User access rights

I don't have to think about anything
I don't have to guess
I dont' have to flip a coin

However, even though that is all good and dandy, network security remains a huge security risk with its many vulnerabilities along the whole transmission chain.

I get lost in all the acronyms and abbreviations, so who is SRP?

 

[hjlbx]

I get lost in all the acronyms and abbreviations, so who is SRP?

Software Restriction Policy

 

[Rod McCarthy]

Software Restriction Policy

Oh,, lol OK...I thought it was a software program...

 

[Tony Cole]

Updated, but it constantly blocks Google Chrome, even if I whitelist Chrome it's still blocked. Chrome runs, but all extensions fail, even lastpass.

 

[jamescv7]

Definitely a big challenge for WinPatrol; it will take little time to create mechanism ; because the scope of threats are widely covered.

When we say widely covered, the samples are at the stage to analyze carefully.

 

[Ray Redbad]

•

 

[Deleted member 2913]

Point taken. But VS will use definition data from VT and in the absence of a Network connection will reject anything. WAR will indeed work without any connection to the Net (I published a video on this a few months ago), allowing good stuff while rejecting the potentially dubious.
That's why I would consider it closer to an anti-exe than a Cloud product like VS.

The whole Cloud and signature thing is more and more problematic. Not taking a dig at Voodooshield, but just pointing out what most of us knew to be true in 1999...

I dont agree regards VS...
VS is primarily an anti-exe & not a cloud product.
VS doesn't use VT definition data or VAi verdict to allow stuffs (It depends on VS Modes you are running)
In the absense of network connection, VS doesn't rejects anything...snapshot/whitelist files are allowed & rest you get alert to allow/block.

VS Modes -
ALWAYS ON - Snapshot/Whitelist files are only allowed, rest you get alert to allow/block (VT & VAi verdict on the alert to help make decision And are not used to auto-allow files)

SMART Mode ( Default) - "ON" & "OFF" -
Smart Mode "ON" - Snapshot/Whitelist files are only allowed, rest you get alert to allow/block (VT & VAi verdict on the alert to help make decision And are not used to auto-allow files)
SMART Mode "OFF" - I think files not detected are auto-allowed.

AUTOPILOT Mode - Files not detected are auto-allowed.

 

[Ray Redbad]

35% Off WinPatrol Products

WAR one year license:
$9.72 USD - 1 user
$12.97 USD - 3 user
$16.22 USD - 5 user

https://www.winpatrol.com/products35/

This is a limited time offer. It will expire about five minutes before you finally get around to wanting it.

 

[Ray Redbad]

Black Friday to Cyber Monday Sale - 65% Off Annual & Lifetime Licenses
Products - WinAntiRansom, WinPatrol, WinPrivacy, Zero Day Threat Protection, AntiMalware
Lifetime Licenses, WinAntiRansom, WinPrivacy, WinPatrol. Ransomware, Zero Day Threat, Malware Protection

i.e. Annual 1 User: $6.98 USD

 

[FleischmannTV]

I usually don't have a lot of faith in PCMag, but this review seems to be rather spot on.

WinPatrol WinAntiRansom

 

[HarborFront]

I usually don't have a lot of faith in PCMag, but this review seems to be rather spot on.

WinPatrol WinAntiRansom

Oooops........WinAntiRansom performs so badly. I wonder what its developer would do next?

 

[Ray Redbad]

Oooops........WinAntiRansom performs so badly. I wonder what its developer would do next?

PC Mag: Good score in our malware blocking test.

What the developer would do next is disregard posers in this forum.

 

[Ray Redbad]

cruelsister comments:
WinAntiRansom Plus Thread

And one might read the member's review of the review in post #514 there.

 

[Ray Redbad]

WinAntiRansom has been re-named WinPatrol WAR.

2016.12.626 - December 14th, 2016

downloads

• Added a Dashboard showing real time statistics.
-Number of Programs discovered, whitelisted programs, programs in quarantine.
-Number of PreEmptive, SafeZone, Network and Protected Registry actions for the day
-The most recent program detected on your computer.
-The full path the program most recently blocked program.
• Ability to enable/disable protection right from the Dashboard.
• Improved Program Discovery.
• Updated Artificial Intelligence Engine, improving detections and reducing false positives.

 

[HarborFront]

WinAntiRansom has been re-named WinPatrol WAR.

2016.12.626 - December 14th, 2016

downloads

• Added a Dashboard showing real time statistics.
-Number of Programs discovered, whitelisted programs, programs in quarantine.
-Number of PreEmptive, SafeZone, Network and Protected Registry actions for the day
-The most recent program detected on your computer.
-The full path the program most recently blocked program.
• Ability to enable/disable protection right from the Dashboard.
• Improved Program Discovery.
• Updated Artificial Intelligence Engine, improving detections and reducing false positives.

I hope this new version can up the detection rate since the last poor review by PC Magazine here

WinPatrol WinAntiRansom

Maybe someone can test it out

 

[Ray Redbad]

poor review by PC Magazine

WAR's review was "poor" because of the tester. That can be said for much of Neil's work and I'm not alone in that opinion as anyone who's followed him for over a decade.
WinPatrol WAR (formerly WinAntiRansom)
WinPatrol WAR (formerly WinAntiRansom)

WAR did better than the new golly gee whiz bang MBAM3 in the just released PC Mag test.

Neil finally got around to it just in time for MBAM but not for WAR: "There's one small problem with these powerful, focused protection layers; they're tough to test."

Source: PC Magazine



I've been using WAR on three systems since early March. It rocks.

 

[Ray Redbad]

MBAM3

No longer able to edit that post to correct myself: MB3.

Neil finally got around to it just in time for MBAM but not for WAR: "There's one small problem with these powerful, focused protection layers; they're tough to test."

And in re-reading that, I should also add the Neil never goes back to update or revise or correct his previous reviews. So the "tough to test" epiphany that his techniques are invalid for this class of software will only trickle up. Products of previous reviews suffer with no venue for appeal.

In the meantime, posers who don't actually use the program(s) will regurgitate the misinformation as valid even upon being confronted with correction or logic.