Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/17/15 in all areas

  1. 7 points
    Official word is, "yes". We will give free license extensions to anyone who upgraded to Windows 10 and was unable to use the firewall. Once the issue has been resolved, please either submit a support ticket in our helpdesk system, or send a Private Message on the forums to me (English Support) or Thomas Ott (English/German Sales). Be sure to mention that you would like to have your license extended due to the Windows 10 issues and include in your message any license keys that were in use on a computer with Windows 10. Feel free to link to this forum post if you would like to.
  2. 6 points
    As announced earlier, we are changing our firewall strategy and will soon merge Emsisoft Internet Security with Emsisoft Anti-Malware, effective as of our next release in October. Instead of developing our own firewall module, we’re going to rely on the built-in Windows Firewall core that has proven to be powerful and reliable. Its only weak point is the fact that anyone can freely change the firewall configuration. In other words, if malware manages to run on the PC with sufficient administrator permissions, it’s able to allow itself to get through the firewall. To resolve this vulnerability, we’ve developed a new Firewall Fortification feature for Emsisoft Anti-Malware’s Behavior Blocker as part of our 2017.8 release. Firewall Fortification detects and intercepts malicious actions from non-trustworthy programs in real time before they can cause any damage. Behavior Blocker alert: Firewall manipulation All 2017.8 improvements in a nutshell Emsisoft Anti-Malware New: Firewall Fortification feature that blocks illegitimate manipulations of Windows Firewall rules. Improved: Forensics logging. Fixed: Rare program freezes on opening the forensics log, confirming of surf protection notifications and during malware detection. Fixed: Computer restart instead of computer shutdown executed, when set for a silent scan. Several minor tweaks and fixes. Emsisoft Enterprise Console Improved certificate handling to avoid connectivity issues. Several minor user interface improvements. Several minor tweaks and fixes. How to obtain the new version As always, so long as you have auto-updates enabled in the software, you will receive the latest version automatically during your regularly scheduled updates, which are hourly by default. New users please download the full installer from our product pages. Note to Enterprise users: If you have chosen to receive “Delayed” updates in the Update settings for your clients, they will receive the new software version no earlier than 30 days after the regular “Stable” availability. This gives you time to perform internal compatibility tests before a new version gets rolled out to your clients automatically. Have a great, well-protected day! View the full article
  3. 4 points
    Guten Tag, Wir haben mittlerweile mehrfach etabliert, dass Emsisoft nicht das Programm Ihrer Wahl ist. Sie haben sich bereits anderweitig ein Antivirus gesucht, dass auch noch dreißig weitere Funktionalitäten mitabdeckt. Fakt ist jedoch, dass viele Leute eben auch ein Antivirenprogramm suchen, dass nicht noch fünfzig Extras mitbringt, die man nicht will oder nicht braucht. Für diese Leute gibt es eben Emsisoft Anti-Malware und die meisten unserer Kunden sind mit der Tatsache, dass es eben 'nur' ein Rundumschutz für den Rechner ist und nicht mehr, zufrieden. Für all die angesprochenen Features - Passwortgenerator, Kinderschutz, etc - gibt es bereits gute Programme, die man sich bei Bedarf installieren kann. Viele Leute haben aber entweder keine Kinder oder wollen diesen den Zugang nicht beschränken, warum sollten wir diesen Leuten einen Kinderschutz mitinstallieren. Einige haben eben auch nicht RAM oder CPU im Überfluß, für diese Leute ist es noch ärgerlichr wenn das RAM durch ein AV belegt ist, dass aufgrund von ungenutzten Features die Ressourcen auffrisst. Fazit: Es gibt viele Antivirenprogramme, die die eierlegende Vollmilchsau sein wollen und versuchen alle Programme in einem zu vereinen. Es gibt User, die diesen Ansatz nicht mögen und nur ein Antivirenprogramm wollen. Nicht mehr. Für diese Leute gibt es, zum Beispiel Emsisoft Anti-Malware. Sie gehören nicht zu dieser Gruppe und das ist ok. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Kathrin
  4. 4 points
    Which for everything related to our core technologies (engine, behavior blocker, cleaning engine) would be me. Hi, nice to meet you! Next time someone looks strange at me for talking to myself I can now point them to this post and tell them you asked me to talk to me . Your argument is that we chose Bitdefender because it is "the best". Both Kaspersky as well as Avira consistently score higher in pure on-demand tests than Bitdefender does. If you consider PUP detection ESET is a superior contender as well. We considered all of them at one point or another but they were discarded for various reasons. The article is based on the submission we got through the "Submit information about detected Malware" option in all our products, which reports back meta data (infection names, number of infected objects) about all infections found by our products.
  5. 3 points
    Please note that Emsisoft Anti-Malware for Windows XP hasn't been updated (as in program updates) in over 2 years, and we never intended on continuing long-term database update support for it. In fact, we discontinued our own database updates for it over a year and a half ago, and those still running Emsisoft Anti-Malware on Windows XP have only been receiving BitDefender database updates. We've decided that it is time to stop redistributing those BitDefender updates for Windows XP, as all they are doing is giving those on Windows XP a false sense of security. In addition, it is extremely dangerous to continue using Windows XP. It has (for several years now) had well-known and major security vulnerabilities that Microsoft will never fix. These vulnerabilities make it trivial to infect a Windows XP system, and there is no security software in the world that is capable of preventing it. We can not, in good conscience, continue to provide any support for this version of Windows, as we announced on December 31st, 2015: https://blog.emsisoft.com/2015/12/02/why-we-believe-its-not-ethical-to-sell-antivirus-software-for-windows-xp-any-longer/ We highly recommend that you upgrade to a newer Operating System that is still supported. It doesn't matter if that's a newer version of Windows, or something free like Linux or BSD, as long as you'll be receiving security updates from whoever makes it. New vulnerabilities are discovered almost every day for every major Operating System (Windows, Linux, BSD, MacOS, Android, etc) so it is absolutely critical that you are able to receive security updates from whoever made the Operating System to help keep you and your data safe.
  6. 3 points
    Wenn alle Features eingebaut würden, die Galaxy wünscht, dann würde ich EAM sofort deinstallieren. Ich mag das Programm so wie es ist und hoffe, das bleibt auch so.
  7. 3 points
    Is this working OK now for everyone else? If it is, then there's no need for any more logs. All we needed was a traceroute to send to our CDN provider to help in identifying the server that was having the issue, and I managed to get one of those the other day.
  8. 3 points
    @achtsam Es wird eher langsam Zeit, dass Du deinen privaten Kreuzzug einstellst. Das nimmt ja wirklich paranoide Züge an.
  9. 3 points
    Hello, a2guard.exe is the visible protection process (to put it simple, the Emsisoft icon you see in the system tray). However actual protection drivers start a lot earlier. For example epp.sys (the Emsisoft Protection Platform driver) starts very early in the Windows boot process in order to ensure a protected system even when no user is logged in yet and no other programs have been started.
  10. 3 points
    For the following ransomware, we have decrypters: Actively spreading ransomware: MRCR or Merry X-Mas Globe Globe 2 Globe 3 Nemucod Philadelphia Stampado Xorist Actively spreading ransomware, but the decrypter only works for older infections: Al-Namrood NMoreira LeChiffre PClock FenixLocker GlobeImposter Inactive ransomware: 777 Apocalypse ApocalypseVM AutoLocky BadBlock CrypBoss CryptInfinite CryptoDefense DMALocker DMALocker2 Fabiansomware Harasom HydraCrypt Gomasom KeyBTC Marlboro OpenToYou OzozaLocker Radamant
  11. 3 points
    Hardik587 You are indeed becoming most wearisome. There is an old expression among diehard Texans. "No matter how much you kick a dead horse it won't get up" This is exactly what you are doing.
  12. 2 points
    It means that the tests done by AV-C and AV-T have a clear image of how they think AV software should work. The problem arises when your product doesn't fit the mould. Then you get penalized for not doing what everyone else does, even though what everyone else does may not be in the best interest of the user, to begin with. Best example: Snooping around in your encrypted connections, which literally every AV vendor screwed up at least once in the past and probably will continue to happen, exposing users to potentially greater risks than most malware does. For starters, the test sets aren't nearly as representative anymore. When we participated in AV-T and AV-C both tested with less than 200 samples a month on average. 200 samples out of literally tens of millions. The exact selection isn't clear and not representative of what users deal with either. None of them tests with PUPs for example, even though a simple look at any tech support community will tell you, that it is probably by far the biggest problem users are dealing with. So no, neither of those test scores represents real-life performance and it becomes blatantly obvious when you go to places like Bleeping Computer, GeeksToGo, Trojaner Board, Malekal, and all those other communities where people infected by malware show up for help and look at what products these victims used at the time they became infected. Then you will notice that a lot of these products with perfect scores don't look nearly as perfect in real-life conditions. The reason for this discrepancy is quite simple: Most AV vendors will specifically optimise their products for these tests. The most severe cases are where vendors end up outright cheating and detecting the test environments which then results in a change of behaviour of the product (think Dieselgate, but with anti-virus). But there are many ways you can game these tests. For example: you can try to figure out the threat intel feeds the companies use, then just buy those same threat intel feeds so you have all samples in advance you can track their licenses and supply different signatures to them or use your cloud to treat those test systems differently some particularly shady organisations literally also sell you their sample and malicious URL feed, so you can just outright buy the samples and URLs your product will get tested on later What you end up with as a result is a product that is optimised really really well for the exact scenario they are being tested under using the exact type of URLs and samples these testers use, but that is utterly useless when it comes to anything else. We just really don't want to create this type of product. So when we were asked whether we wanted to continue to participate this year, we discussed the matter internally, looked at what we get out of these tests (meaning: whether these tests have a discernable impact on our revenue) and decided that they are simply not worth it and that the tens of thousands of Euros we spent on them every year would be better spent on extending our team and building new ways of keeping our customers safe.
  13. 2 points
    Personally I think following the tests is a waste of time. If you are really concerned then you will need to make the effort to do your own testing. that is what I did. Also the tests don't tell you a thing about the nature of the company. I will stick with Emsisoft because I think it's the best
  14. 2 points
    Hello RodPaulo! Over the last three months, we gradually rolled out new infrastructure for our behavior blocker as part of the monthly feature updates. We decided to introduce this new tech gradually as to avoid headaches when switching everything at once. In addition, just the infrastructure on its own had major benefits like fixing several long-standing compatibility issues with products like Kaspersky, Avast, AVG and some other products, that rendered systems unusable as no process could be started on systems running both EAM and their product in real-time. The rollout itself was pretty smooth and we didn't see anything unusual in our telemetry or continuous daily testing either. However, it turned out that there was a rare race condition with certain malware obfuscators that caused some 32-bit processes to not be monitored correctly on Windows 10 64-bit systems. AV-C did report the issue to us as part of their normal report at the end of March and we fixed and released it as an update during the 2018.3 lifecycle very shortly after, but by then we already had racked up a couple of misses in the April test period as well. You may also be interested in the AV-C business test series factsheet they just published, available here: https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/avc_biz_2018_03_factsheet_en.pdf
  15. 2 points
    You could also use a third-party DNS service that has DNS filtering and protects against DNS security issues. A popular example is OpenDNS (although there should be others as well): https://www.opendns.com/home-internet-security/
  16. 2 points
    We had to turn off XP updates because the latest scan engine and its signatures are no longer compatible with it. Instead of pretending that we could protect you from malware (which we effectively can't because XP is full of holes and flaws that aren't gonna be fixed at all) we would rather strongly recommend you to upgrade your computer. If that is for any reason impossible and means that you can't use our software anymore at all, we're happy to issue a refund for the remaining period.
  17. 2 points
    It is not the UI doing the protection, it is the service/driver, and they are the first things to be loaded during boot even before your desktop appears.
  18. 2 points
    Emsisoft Anti-Malware is compatible with the Windows update. We also just published an update that sets the compatibility flag for all users of the beta, stable and delayed update feed. Keep in mind, that Microsoft uses the same flag for all anti-virus vendors. That means if you are using multiple anti-viruses or anti-malware applications, you are risking one of those products, like Emsisoft Anti-Malware, flagging the system as compatible, even though one of your other products is not compatible. There is, unfortunately, nothing we can do to prevent this as Microsoft does not account for the scenario of multiple security products being installed on the same system. This is the perfect example why we are recommending against using multiple security products in parallel. For further information, feel free to stop by our blog.
  19. 2 points
    Just for fun (and reference) I took a screenshot of the visitor stats from my own private server. The screenshot is censored so it doesn't show IP addresses, the names of files visitors accessed, or what websites they were referred from. Here's a link if anyone wants to see it: https://www.gt500.org/images/http_stats.png This is just general statistics compiled from server logs, and you can actually get a little more information than what you see there from those logs. I guess what I'm trying to say is simply that if website owners really want to track you, they don't don't need Google or other analytics services to do it. Especially since there's no way to prevent the server from logging all of this data (since the servers do that automatically and have access to all of that data when your web browser loads anything from the server). If this is something you're concerned about then TOR, VPN's, and Virtual Machines are going to do you much more good than worrying about what "trackers" are being used by any individual webpage. TOR and VPN's help keep your IP address private and make it very difficult to determine where you actually are, and of course Virtual Machine's give a generic system for you to browse on and you can restore to a snapshot to reset everything to the condition it was in before you started browsing. Some things may be unique to your Virtual Machine, such as the combination of your CPU and the amount of RAM and disk space, so in theory it would still be possible to "fingerprint" it, however does it really matter if a website "fingerprints" a Virtual Machine (especially when they can't determine the geographical location)? Also note that "browser fingerprinting" isn't something that I tend to worry much about. It's unfortunate that it's possible, but it's also benign in the vast majority of cases, and the lengths you have to go to in order to prevent it are... well... more that I would be willing to do for something that isn't going to effect me enough for me to care. uBlock Origin blocks most advertising and tracking stuff, so the amount of money that advertisers can make by "fingerprinting" my browser and targeting me is minimal, and if the NSA wants to monitor me then I expect the only way to truly prevent that is to live in a lead box and never connect to the Internet again.
  20. 2 points
    Wenn man seriöse Seiten aufruft, Programme nur aus verlässlichen Quellen verwendet und installiert und auch mal liest was da bei einer Installation alles so steht und an Haken gesetzt ist, dass Gehirn einschaltet und auch nicht immer alle Links in E-Mail anklickt, dann ist man EAM bestens gerüstete! Denn die Router Firewall sollte ihren Dienst auch ausreichend verrichten. Ich verwende seit 2006 keine Firewall mehr, wie z.B. Zonealarm und habe seit dem auch nicht mehr Probleme, im Gegenteil, dass System läuft wesentlich flüssiger! Im großen und ganzen muss man feststellen, dass Emsisoft seine Hausaufgaben sehr gut erledigt, auf Kunden Beanstandungen Zeitnah reagiert und vor allem im direkten Kontakt zum Kunden steht! Dass kenne ich von keinem anderen Hersteller und ich habe schon viele AV-Programme getestet! Von daher sollte man sich ernsthaft überlegen, ob man Emsi verlassen sollte.
  21. 2 points
    Arbeite doch einfach selbst Deine Profilneurose auf, oder suche Dir professionelle Hilfe. Ich bin ziemlich sicher, daß das Sammeln von likes und dislikes Dir nicht wirklich weiterhelfen wird...
  22. 2 points
    From (very) humble beginnings in a Windows XP Service Pack update, the Windows Firewall has evolved into a capable security tool. Today, its performance is on par with – if not better than – any modern third-party desktop firewall on the market. In light of this, and after a lot of careful consideration, the Emsisoft team made a very conscious decision to rely on the Windows Firewall moving forward, which ultimately led to us merging Emsisoft Internet Security with Emsisoft Anti-Malware. This will allow us to concentrate our efforts on building a bulletproof product while using our Behavior Blocker technology to further strengthen the already rock-solid Windows Firewall. To put it simply, using Windows Firewall in conjunction with Emsisoft Anti-Malware will provide better protection for our users, and that is our number one objective above all else. Since our announcement of the Emsisoft Internet Security and Emsisoft Anti-Malware merger, we have received a lot of positive feedback. However, we also got a lot of questions. We want to take the time to answer the most frequently asked questions in a bit more detail: So are you going to remove the firewall completely? The answer to that question is not as simple as it may seem at first. Firewalls are usually divided into two parts: A so-called packet filter, which usually deals with incoming packets and is therefore often called an inbound firewall; and an application filter that deals with applications wanting to access the network or internet, which is why it is often also referred to as an outbound firewall. Emsisoft Anti-Malware has always had an application filter as part of its Behavior Blocker and that will continue to be true. The difference between the outbound firewall in Emsisoft Anti-Malware and Emsisoft Internet Security is that the former makes decisions autonomously, while the later, at least in theory, allowed you to also use your manual rules. In practice, the default for Emsisoft Internet Security was to automatically allow all outbound connections and the majority of all our users never changed it. Why did you make the change? Was Emsisoft Internet Security less secure than the Windows Firewall? No. All firewalls on modern versions of Windows are based on the same technologies provided by Microsoft. In addition, inbound firewalls in particular are incredibly straightforward to implement, as they only block or allow access based on simple rules. That is why there is absolutely no difference in protection provided between any of the inbound firewalls on the market, including the Windows Firewall. However, the Windows Firewall does have some benefits: Support for Windows Networking like Home Groups is a lot better in the Windows Firewall out of the box. There is no need to tweak any rules manually as was often the case for Emsisoft Internet Security. It is easier to use. This is mostly because third-party applications will take care of creating all necessary firewall rules for you. That is not an option that Emsisoft Internet Security could provide, as most software vendors don’t care about third-party firewalls. The Windows Firewall also provides much better compatibility. Third-party software vendors usually test their products with the Windows Firewall as it is part of Windows, but almost never test their product’s compatibility with aftermarket firewall products. Last but not least, the Windows Firewall also provides a lot more configuration possibilities to expert users and allows for much more complex rulesets than the inbound firewall offered as part of Emsisoft Internet Security. But there are also a couple of disadvantages, which is where Emsisoft Anti-Malware 2017.8 comes in: Intelligent outbound firewall: The outbound firewall part of the Windows Firewall will by default allow every application to connect. This behaviour is actually identical with Emsisoft Internet Security, which also allowed any application to connect to the network or the internet unhindered by default. While both products can be manually configured to block programs from accessing the internet, most users don’t want to deal with this responsibility. This is where the intelligent outbound firewall that is part of our Behavior Blocker comes in, which will prevent malicious applications from communicating with the internet automatically while not getting in the way of benign applications. Enhanced malware protection: The Windows Firewall on its own does not provide any protection against more sophisticated attempts to bypass its outbound firewall through advanced techniques like code injection. Code injection essentially allows malware to take over a trusted program in order for its internet communication to pass through the firewall unhindered. Again, the Behavior Blocker in Emsisoft Anti-Malware is incredibly good at detecting and preventing these kinds of attacks. Windows Firewall Fortification: The functions Windows Firewall provides to software vendors to automatically create rules for their applications in the Windows Firewall for ease of use are also pretty much unprotected. That means that malware can and does create rules for itself automatically. In version 2017.8, we extended our Behavior Blocker technology to protect the exposed Windows Firewall functions from malicious usage. This gives you control over which of your applications are allowed to create Windows Firewall rules for you and which aren’t. This is what we refer to as “Windows Firewall Fortification”. To sum things up, for inbound filtering, the Windows Firewall is just as solid a choice as any other firewall product on the market, including Emsisoft Internet Security. It provides better compatibility and is easier to use for the majority of users. Its drawbacks mostly revolve around its outbound filtering capabilities, which are perfectly complemented by the enhanced Behavior Blocker that is part of Emsisoft Anti-Malware 2017.8 and later. Where can I find the new Windows Firewall Fortification options? The new options are part of the Emsisoft Anti-Malware Behavior Blocker. As such, you can find them under Protection/Application Rules: In addition, whenever the Behavior Blocker sees any application it doesn’t know to be trustworthy attempting to create new firewall rules or change the firewall status, it will attempt to auto-resolve the situation by blocking the attempt: If you have auto-resolve disabled, it will simply ask. Where can I find the “advanced configuration possibilities” you talk about? My Windows Firewall only has a couple of options! The default dialog to configure the Windows Firewall can be incredibly deceptive at first. The advanced configuration dialog is stashed away behind an innocuous looking link in the normal Windows Firewall configuration dialog: Windows Firewall dialog with link to Advanced settings Clicking that link will expose the real configuration of the Windows Firewall where you have full access to all the rules it adheres by. That looks awfully complicated. Are there easier methods? There exist a slew of additional applications that sit on top of the Windows Firewall and attempt to enhance it by making rule creation and management easier. Some of the most popular are: TinyWall (Free) – http://tinywall.pados.hu/ Windows Firewall Control (Freemium) – https://www.binisoft.org/wfc.php Glasswire (Paid) – https://www.glasswire.com/ That being said, we think that the majority of users probably won’t find these tools to be necessary. That is also why we decided against creating our own Windows Firewall front-end and focus our development efforts on improving the complementary and enhanced technology in our Behavior Blocker instead. So what do you recommend I should do? We strongly believe that the combination of Emsisoft Anti-Malware and the Windows Firewall is the best option for almost every user. For the past 12 years while developing our product, we used this exact combination in all of our internal performance evaluations of our technology. Our malware research team works hard to make sure that even the most advanced threats are blocked immediately across all our products. So yes, Emsisoft Anti-Malware blocks the same malware that Emsisoft Internet Security blocks out of the box – no configuration, paying extra or jumping through hoops needed. If you do feel the need to make sure that certain legitimate applications can’t access the internet, the Windows Firewall does offer the ability to do so via its Advanced Settings. If you find that method to be too inconvenient, going with one of the many front-ends may be an option for you. We do know that a small minority of Emsisoft Internet Security users believe that the Windows Firewall must have backdoors implemented by Microsoft to allow them to spy on their users. In all our research, we haven’t found one and neither have hundreds of other security professionals that constantly review Windows for possible backdoors and vulnerabilities. We also think it is important to keep in mind that every single firewall product for Windows Vista and later uses the very same frameworks to implement packet and application filtering. There is no difference between the Windows Firewall, Emsisoft Internet Security and any other third party firewall from a technical point of view. If Microsoft were to backdoor their products to allow unhindered communication, this backdoor would probably be part of the Windows Filter Platform or the NDIS Lightweight Filter Framework, which are the underlying technologies all firewall products are built upon, and affect every firewall product equally. If you still prefer to use a firewall product other than the Windows Firewall, we recommend you contact the software company creating your new firewall product of choice beforehand to ask them whether they implement their own firewall or rely on the Windows Firewall as well. Most firewalls and internet security suites dropped their own implementation in favour of the Windows Firewall many years ago. So we suggest you ask them first to make sure you don’t end up with a Windows Firewall front-end instead. Do you have more questions? Post them in the comments and we’ll answer them. Have an excellent (malware-free) day! View the full article
  23. 2 points
    You don't need an account on the website; you just copy & paste the licence code into the application. Keep the details in case you need them again.
  24. 2 points
    Hello to you all, l don't know how some of you are going to react to my post but the end is what matters. On Friday morning we (company) where infected from the Cry36 Virus(Ransom). Our Server 2008R2 was with anti-virus and with Windows Update.. up to date.. At the time we had a external Hard drive connected to the server (the only one we had) since we didn't have a duplicate due the second one failed on us. Due to hard times here in Greece we thought that one hard drive was enough. Since our server was under repair with a raid problem we had an live backup. All our files where encrypted.. Most you will probably understand. We called local Police, Internet Crime Center Greece and Interpol. We had support for a number o techs, antivirus profs in Greece and around the world. We had no choice but to gamble with the hackers. They asked for $800 in bit coin. We had nearly every day email exchange with them. The process to obtain bit coin was a long and stressing time. The amount of money we where loosing day by day was nightmare. After 8 days we had the bit coin, we transferred them to the people responsible and in 15min we had the unlock.exe we our ID and a password from Greece to US. They even gave us instructions and warnings not to damage the files. We got all our files back!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yes we did the wrong thing and payed. In the end we lost a lot of money and lived 10 days of hell!!!!! The virus was infected from a personal email...
  25. 2 points
    Ah, I see everyone already saw the stable build. You're welcome.
  26. 2 points
    Hello, When it comes to surfing: keep it simple, a browser is only as safe as it's user. I'd advice against using any browser "security" that intercepts https traffic, for an explanation see here: http://blog.emsisoft.com/2017/02/09/https-interception-what-emsisoft-customers-need-to-know/ Choose the browser that suits you best en practice safe surfing (use an adblocker, use a password manager as alternative to using easy to guess or identical passwords), don't visit shady sites and if you're not sure about a site, scan the URL on http://www.virustotal.com Personally I use Google Chrome with uBlock origin, Lastpass, and a few small add-ons that help facilitate certain routine tasks. never had any browser-related security issues.
  27. 2 points
    For reinstallation media, always use the Media Creation tool to ensure as much updates as possible are included (this is generally a good idea because it also reduces the amount of updates you'll have to install after installation): https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/software-download/windows10 As for the rest, the vulnerability is/was in the SMB (server message block) protocol, which is not something an average home user requires, if you are concerned you can just reinstall Windows without network connection, go to Programs and Features > Turn Windows Features On and Off and in the populated list locate SMB1, uninstall this before continuing.
  28. 2 points
    It doesn't matter if it is securely transmitted or not. Your browser decrypts the HTTPS traffic when it is received, so the file would be saved in its original form, and our protection would catch it either way. HTTPS (secure connections) are only intended to keep information being exchanged over the Internet private. For instance, if you do a search on your favorite search engine, and the connection to their website uses HTTPS (and thus is secure), then when the NSA records the data that is sent from your computer to the search engine tell it what you want to search for, that data is encrypted, and thus the NSA can't actually tell what you searched for if they were to review the data they had collected (obviously they may have other ways of finding out, but at least they can't get it from the HTTPS traffic). Of course, I'm using the NSA as an example due to the various leaks revealing that they record everything that is transmitted across the Internet. The original purpose of HTTPS was to secure online purchases and other information you submit to websites from criminals snooping on data sent across the Internet. If malware is downloaded over a secure connection, then all it really does is keep anyone from snooping on your Internet traffic (or government agencies recording everything you do online) from seeing what you downloaded. That sort of thing would generally be done either with malicious extensions, or some sort of malicious program on your computer. If there is something malicious on your computer, then everything is compromised, and not just a single tab. Note that most modern browsers (except maybe Firefox) have a sandbox for each tab in the browser, which should isolate the tabs from each other. I have never saw these words before and do not know what they are . ClassicShell is a program for Windows 8, Windows 8.1, and Windows 10 that adds the classic Windows 7 Start Menu to these newer versions of Windows. AmmyAdmin is a remote access software similar to TeamViewer. There are testing organizations/companies that will test websites for security problems periodically, and some website owners will sign up for those services to ensure their websites are secure. With paid services the website owners are usually allowed to put some sort of graphic on their website that links back to the latest test results to allow visitors to verify whether or not the website is secure. If you see one of those graphics on a page, and can click on it to verify that it is valid, then the website is more than likely secure. If there is no such graphic on a website, then there will be no publicly available way to verify the website is secure, however this does not mean the website unsafe. As an example, GT500.org doesn't have a graphic/button/etc. that you can click on to see if the website has been tested, however it is tested weekly for security vulnerabilities by Beyond Security and is almost always given the highest possible score (when it isn't, any security issues are dealt with quickly).
  29. 2 points
    Hi LandLord323, Unfortunately, we can't decrypt your files for free. I suggest either making sure you change the RDP password to be more secure or disabling it if you do not use it as that is how they get access. Regards, Sarah
  30. 2 points
    Hi Deco, You can get the beta version of our software by switching to "Beta" feedback in Settings > Update settings, you can choose it from the dropdown menu. You can switch back to the "Stable" version at any time. We give a free license to the testers that participate actively in reporting any bugs or feedback. Orlando
  31. 2 points
    Das Problem ist, dass keine Schutzsoftware Dir helfen kann. Wenn der Server aufgemacht wird, was bei TeamXRat, die Malware die dahinter steckt, der Fall ist, kann der Angreifer die Software einfach beenden oder die Malware erlauben. Ich hab die Malware kurz ueberflogen und sie sieht entschluesselbar aus. Falls das Loesegeld also noch nicht bezahlt wurde, dann kann ich mal schauen was ich tun kann.
  32. 2 points
    That would help in this particular instance (alerts during an uninstall), however every rule that exists can decrease performance, so rules are generally not kept if they are not needed.
  33. 2 points
    Hi CBMan, Thank you for your suggestion. As the idea seems fair to me, I added your suggestion in our tracker. Will be discussed soon and then we will decide if discard or work on it. Thanks again, Orlando
  34. 2 points
    Zum AV-C Test: Bei dem Test gab es ein Problem mit dem Testsetup. Es ist nicht ganz klar ob entweder das automatische Testsystem von AV-C oder EAM versagt hat. Allerdings gab es 13 Samples die als nicht erkannt klassifiziert wurden. Weder AV-C noch wir konnten das Problem reproduzieren, weshalb nach einem Nachtest alle "misses" in "user decisions" umgeklariert wurden. Allerdings ist auch die Klassifizierung irrefuehrend. Das Problem ist, dass unsere Cloud die meisten Anfragen automatisch haette beantworten koennen. Allerdings wurden alle Nachtests ohne Cloud durchgefuehrt, weil wir halt schummeln und alle Dateien in der Cloud haetten Blacklisten koennen und AV-C keine Moeglichkeit hat, unsere Cloud zum Zeitpunkt des Originaltests zurueck zu drehen. Fehlalarme wurden durch Setups verursacht die Double Signed sind. EAM hatte in dem Fall Probleme die digitalen Signaturen korrekt zu erkennen. Das Problem wurde mittlerweile allerdings behoben.
  35. 2 points
    Thanks, works great, thanks for all the feedback in this thread and for getting it sorted.
  36. 2 points
    Actually, as I am reading some information I was sent about the changes to Game Mode, we no longer check for fullscreen applications periodically, so there should no longer be GPU spikes regardless of the state of the above option. We now check if it is appropriate to display notifications in a completely different way, which shouldn't have any bearing on GPU activity or clock speed. There's also an option in the settings for Notifications to toggle displaying notifications when in Game Mode.
  37. 2 points
    Perhaps add to EAM an option to disable this feature? Not all of us are gamers ..............................
  38. 2 points
    Yes, this is normal. It's possible that there may be something we can do to prevent the extra notification, so I'll talk to our QA team and see what they think about this.
  39. 2 points
    Hallo und vielen Dank für die Anfrage bei uns im Support-Forum. Bitte vielmals um entschuldigung, bei einem Upgrade zu Emsisoft Internet Security wurde scheinbar die Rabattstufe nicht richtig auf den neuen Lizenzschlüssel übertragen. Ich habe das nun für Sie nachgeholt und eine Verlängerung mit angemessenen Kunden- und Mengen-Rabatt ist nun über unsere Verlängerungsseite möglich: http://www.emsisoft.de/de/order/renew/ Da das Lizenzende schon sehr bald eingetreten wäre habe ich die Lizenz ein wenig verlängert so dass genügend Zeit für eine Verlängerung übrig bleibt. Vielen Dank dass Sie unsere Softwarelösungen verwenden. Sollten noch weitere Fragen bestehen, so stehe ich gerne dafür zur Verfügung.
  40. 2 points
    I know, that is why I only counted signature updates. Whenever you see an exact signature count in the change log above, one of our signatures was updated. Sorry, what you ask is impossible. It should be obvious to anyone, that if you have a scan engine that already detects 95% of all malware out there, that the other engine can't suddenly detect more than that without causing gross redundancy. In general we can choose to waste hundreds of megabytes of RAM on hundreds of thousands of systems to keep duplicate signatures around so you feel validated in your purchase, or we can choose not to do that, not to waste everyone's resources. To be honest, that's not even a choice really.
  41. 2 points
    You can go ahead and have EEK safely delete: Value: HKEY_USERS\S-1-5-21-3104866962-3908348715-1408370962-1001\SOFTWARE\MICROSOFT\WINDOWS\CURRENTVERSION\POLICIES\SYSTEM -> DISABLETASKMGR detected: Setting.DisableTaskMgr (A) Value: HKEY_USERS\S-1-5-21-3104866962-3908348715-1408370962-1001\SOFTWARE\MICROSOFT\WINDOWS\CURRENTVERSION\POLICIES\SYSTEM -> DISABLEREGISTRYTOOLS detected: Setting.DisableRegistryTools (A)Everything else looks good.Unless you are having problems, it is time to do the final steps. Now to remove most of the tools that we have used in fixing your machine: Download Delfix from here and save it to your desktop. Ensure Remove disinfection tools is checked.Also place a checkmark next to:Create registry backupPurge system restoreClick the Run button.When the tool is finished, a log will open in notepad. I do not need the log. You can close Notepad.Empty the Recycle Bin Download to your Desktop: - CCleaner Portable UnZip CCleaner Portable to a folder on your Desktop named CCleanerRun CCleanerOpen the CCleaner Folder on your Desktop and double click CCleaner.exe (32-bit) or CCleaner64.exe (64-bit) Click "Options" and choose "Advanced" Uncheck "Only delete files in Windows Temp folders older than 24 hours" Then go back to "Cleaner" and click the "RunCleaner" button. Exit CCleaner. Turn off System restore to flush all your restore points then turn system restore back on. See How To Enable and Disable System Restore.You can delete and uninstall any programs I had you download, that you do not wish to keep on the system. Run Windows Update and update your Windows Operating System. Install and run the , this will inspect your system for software that is out-of-date and in need of updating. Update anything program/application detected as being out-dated. Articles to read: How to Protect Your Computer From Malware How to keep you and your Windows PC happy Web , email, chat, password and kids safety 10 Sources of Malware Infections That should take care of everything. Safe Surfing!
  42. 2 points
    Hallo Marian, Testberichte die sich mit unseren Softwareprodukten befassen können gesammelt unter http://www.anti-malware-testberichte.de/ eingesehen werden. Die Entscheidung "nur" an den AV-Comparatives und VirusBulletin - Tests als große Testanbieter teilzunehmen hatte rein wirtschaftliche Gründe. Wir investieren unsere begrenzten Ressourcen in die weitere Entwicklung unserer Produkte anstatt durch weitere Tests Bestätigungen unserer Leistungsfähigkeit zu generieren.
  43. 2 points
    You have to be careful if you are behind a router. You may just be testing that.
  44. 2 points
    We don't have an ETA for the stable release of version 11. Hopefully it won't be too long.
  45. 2 points
    A summary of the improvements in version 11 can be found in our blog as usual: http://blog.emsisoft.com/2015/10/24/a-sneak-peek-on-emsisofts-version-11-series/ Keep in mind that it is currently only available via the Beta updates option.
  46. 2 points
    I appreciate the honesty but I hope you understand that a bug like this needs to be fixed on top priority. It prevents the download of critical updates unless the Firewall is deactivated but deactivating the firewall can make the system vulnerable. I mean an issue as critical as this should be treated as soon as possible.
  47. 2 points
    It's been more than a week now since the issue was reported here. Is there a deadline to get this issue fixed?
  48. 2 points
    Hallo, Ja das ist kein Problem. Vermieden werden sollte lediglich zwei Desktopfirewalls parallel zu installieren. Zum Beispiel Emsisoft Internet Security und Bitdefender Internet Security gleichzeitig zu installieren. Sollten weitere Fragen bestehen kontaktieren Sie uns bitte erneut.
  49. 2 points
    I don't have any insight in the test-methodology apart from what the article states, but a few observations make me doubt the relevancy of this test: The test compares a number of different products: antirootkit scanners and anti-malware scanners. This makes no sense to me. TDSSkiller is an excellent Antirootkit scanner in my opinion, but it is a limited tool, you cannot compare this with a anti-malware scanner like EEK or MBAM because its simply a different product. The tested malware is for the most part very, very old and not seen in the wild anymore, even though the article states 2015 and "in the wild" in the title. To give a few examples: Alureon/TDL3/4 hasn't been around "in the wild" for at least 3 years (and thats estimating it very loosely) The article listed is from 2010 (!) http://contagiodump.blogspot.gr/2011/02/tdss-tdl-4-alureon-32-bit-and-64-bit.html?m=1 The same goes for ZeroAccess/Max++. The latest usermode version of that rootkit was active in 2013 and after the botnet was taken down for a large part, there has been no re-emergence of this malware. However, its kernelmode version was quite a bit older, this was last seen in 2011. Sure, its interesting to see how products perform against such rootkits, but how useful is it? Those rootkits were "retired" for a very good reason, they can no longer infected today's OS versions. Finally, I'm not one to make accusations, but I don't like "sponsored by..." tests. I'm fully willing to believe that Zemana was indeed the best product to remove all these infections, but I just think its not the best strategy for any testing lab to let a sponsor also participate in the tests, just to avoid any possible doubt as to the objectiveness of the test results.
  50. 2 points
    At the moment it is not possible to delete multiple lines at once. I have made a suggestion internally to add it though.
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?

    Sign Up