MarkD

Member
  • Content Count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MarkD

  1. I had wondered about that. I chatted with their support and it was they who stated there was no extension for Edge. I am using the new release. I guess that if they don't officially support it they can't recommend that course of action.
  2. Well, I installed the trial and it runs perfectly side-by-side with EAM. The only time EAM noticed it was when I uninstalled it and I had to mark 5 files as being safe. I uninstalled the demo because while Zonealarm offers an extension for Chrome, an extension is not available for Edge. This was a deal-breaker for me because my work and purchases are via Edge, while social media/entertainment are via Chrome. So, if anyone wonders how well they play together, they are fine. However, Zonealarm did not need to spring into action so I have no idea what would happen if it had identified a process as being 'ransomware-like'.
  3. These are great responses - thank you. I like your suggestions @digmor crusher especially Syshardener which seems to apply a lot of settings I configure at work. However, I am after dedicated protection against ransomware. The suggestions above are great, but at the end of the day they mitigate against some of the methods via which the malware can be dropped onto the system, or via which it can communicate to a C2 server. I think my best bet is to run Zonealarm's offering as a trial and see how EAM plays along with it. Thanks again to everyone for your suggestions, it is appreciated very much indeed. Cheers! Mark
  4. These are all good points and I am not questioning EAM / Emisisoft's ability to protect against ransomware. Social engineering is not just convincing someone to disable their security software. I do a varying amount of weekly research on ransomware and understand that the only product that seems to stand up to all ransomware (as of my last reading), and which also includes a very successful remediation rate is Intercept X. However, I suspect that despite the valiant efforts of the Sophos team, Intercept X may eventually become compromised and that would also require additional layers of security. You are preaching to the converted - I would not have been using EAM since its A-squared days if I thought it was not up to the job. However, I consider it sensible to incorporate another layer of security through which any malware will need to traverse and I am simply trying to find out if anyone has used Checkpoint's offering alongside EAM before I commit and purchase it.
  5. Thank you for responding to my query. I agree that EAM protects against malware. I disagree that ransomware is in the same boat - encrypting files is done legitimately thousands of times every day - it is determining whether the encryption is malicious that is the issue. Coupled with the fact that ransomware variants are able to easily elude many corporate editions of security products (just look at the news items - there are many examples), I feel having more than one layer of protection is important. I agree that EAM has excellent (and intelligent) heuristics, however, additional protection can't be a bad thing. I was just wondering if anyone else had any experience of using these products side-by-side. Thanks again. Mark
  6. Hello I was considering supplementing EAM with Checkpoint's paid-for Zonealarm anti-ransomware software. Looking at reviews it performs extremely well and it states that it runs fine with other security software. Trawling the forums I could only find this which related to compatibility issues between EAM and Checkpoint's anti-ransomware but it is from 2017. In the past I have always stuck with a single security product. However, ransomware is now the predominant threat and it seems that even companies with gazillions to spend on security are falling victim (via social engineering). I reckon the extra layer of protection will be well worth it. I know that EAM is a great product (I have been using it for over 10 years) but would like to get people's thoughts/experience with this, please. Thank you. Mark
  7. Sorted it. A while ago Soundcloud introduced adverts. After disabling Privacy Badger for the site, the Ads play and the controls are dimmed. Privacy Badger was preventing the ads from playing thus the controls remained dimmed. As I can't stand the enforced humour and you're not going to succeed and be incredibly good looking unless "Hey!! Do YOU want to get your music heard by MORE people...blah frickin' blah..." I just refresh the page. Extension back in place after this....
  8. Thank you for the suggestion. The other extensions I have installed - New Tabs To Front, IMTranslator and Privacy Badger have been installed for over a year. The only one that is regularly updated is IMTranslator. I will submit some feedback to the Souncloud posse and see if they have any further suggestions.
  9. Well, it was nothing to do with the extension. This morning the same thing happened without the extension in place. It was pure coincidence it happened after both times I installed it!
  10. Every day. It's OK. I've uninstalled it and will reinstall in a few weeks time to see how it is.
  11. Hello again I have been trying out the browser extension in Chrome Version 71.0.3578.98 (Official Build) (64-bit) on Windows 10 1803. I have an issue with just one page - https://soundcloud.com/stream. This page has always worked fine (I've been using Soundcloud for many years). After I installed the extension I found that the play controls on the page would occasionally not respond. I uninstalled it for a week or so and everything returned to normal. Today I reinstalled the extension and the same thing happened. OK, so I can add an exception - but there is no way to add an exception. A new page appears and I can see a table with a 'Websites' heading and a remove button, but no way to add. I am unable to enter text on that page. Any ideas, please? Thanks
  12. Hi, GT500 and JeremyNicoll. Thank you both for responding. No, the update had finished and I don't have a scheduled scan set up. It occurred for an entire afternoon/evening even after restarts. The crash happened twice (before and after a restart). However, as is the way of these things the program has been working fine for the last two days. Thanks also for the extra info about the browser extension.
  13. Hi Today, my Windows 10 PC became very sluggish. I checked Task Manager and when it finally opened I saw that the CPU usage for the Emsisoft Protection Service and the Emsisoft Security Center were collectively using between 30% and 40%. I changed my file guard settings from Paranoid to Default and the program became completely unresponsive with CPU usage shooting up to 94%. My PC is a custom built machine about 4 years old. 16GB RAM, SSD system drive, 3TB SATA secondary drive. Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4790K CPU @ 4.00GHz, 4001 Mhz, 4 Core(s), 8 Logical Processor(s). At the time I had iTunes and Chrome (just a couple of tabs - Facebook, Soundcloud) running. Any ideas, please? Also, I was surprised to see a notification after the program update to install a Chrome add-on. Doesn't EAM do all this out of the box?
  14. Ah! Thanks. I think I must have been confused about how each operated. That's reassuring.
  15. This was my point about being able to control access. With the EmsiSoft firewall known good programs were allowed access, or you could configure it to ask. No such luck with controlling the Windows Firewall. Much as I like EmsiSofts products (and I have been using them for many years), I think this is a step backwards. I have read the FAQ article, where it is stated that one of the disadvantages is the way the outbound rules function, and while EAM will detect tampering of the firewall, the outbound connection from a zero-day threat will not be stopped, which it would have been under previous versions because EIS would have displayed a notification that an unknown process was attempting to connect to xxx.
  16. I would also like to know about this. I knew that EIS was moving over to using the Windows Firewall, but I assumed EIS would provide an interface for it - something existing users are familiar with - rather than simply removing the Firewall from the list of Protection configuration options. Is the latest version of EmsiSoft's product without firewall support?
  17. Ahh - thanks for the explanation. That's a bummer when that happens.
  18. I use the web and mobile versions of Facebook's Messenger. This morning I opened the Messenger app on my tablet without any problems and Emsisoft Mobile Security did not even blink. A few minutes later I powered down the tablet and opened Google Chrome which starts with a pinned page - www.messenger.com and which automatically signs me in. But, the site was blocked - please see the attachment. I've done a web search but cannot see any articles about the site being compromised. Is this a mis-categorised site?
  19. ... and, thanks to Christian Peters and the folks at Emsisoft, the issue has been fixed.
  20. Thanks, Christian I have done that and have just sent the email with the logs.
  21. Thanks for the response. My Wi-Fi connection is shown as Private.
  22. Hello I am using Emsisoft Internet Security (and have been for many years). My home PC runs Windows 10 Professional. My job is IT and I regularly need to establish a VPN connection to my employer's network and then use RDP to connect to the servers/desktops to install Windows updates, check the backup etc. I have been using VPN/RDP for about 10 years. About the 14th January I was suddenly unable to establish an RDP connection and have not been able to do so since. I tried various troubleshooting methods and this morning I uninstalled Emsisoft Internet Security and was able to establish an RDP connection. I use Microsoft's Remote Desktop Connection Manager V2.2. After establishing the VPN connection I open RDCM, right-click a server and the log in dialog usually appears immediately. I have tried connecting to my work Windows 7 Pro client and to Windows server 2008, 2012 and 2012 R2. Since 14th Jan, when I right-click a server and choose Connect Server, the connection attempt times-out. So, this morning I uninstalled EIS and everything worked - the RDP connection to the server was immediate: the server log in dialog appeared straight away. I downloaded the latest version of EIS (I always keep EIS up to date with signature and program updates anyway), installed it, and after installation I am again unable to establish an RDP connection. I have also tried the standard 'Remote Desktop Connection' Desktop App but that fails too. My home network uses 192.168.0.xxx and my work network uses 192.168.1.xxx. I use an LMHOSTS file to identify the Windows domain and to map the IP/name of our data server. I have tried rebuilding the TCP stack, SFC, and even tried adding the servers to the HOSTS file. I was hoping that after reinstalling EIS the firewall would prompt me and ask if I wanted to allow the RDP connection request to be sent but I see no response from EIS at all. I have also tried disabling all EIS components but the RDP connection still times-out. Can anyone help me with this, please? Thanks.
  23. Same problem here. Tried GT500's suggestion but after installing the firewall driver via the network adaptor's Properties dialog but the same error message about a component failing to start appeared. It's the same component dependency that failed - the firewall NDIS driver. Thanks for the suggestions though and glad to hear the beta is working as expected. I'll check back each day for news of any updates - will these be posted to the blog?