Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Raynor

  1. A small but persistent glitch that I can't seem to get rid off and that has been present pretty much since I started using the cloud console beta: The device count for the workspace top level constantly says "1", when in reality there is no device in this group. All my three devices are in subgroups... Please refer to the attached screenshot
  2. I have been beta testing the cloud console at home with three devices for some time now. Now I tried to remove one of the devices from the console, so that it won't be remotely managed any more. When I remove it from the workspace, at first it is correctly shown as "unmanaged" (red tag), and when I check the local EAM GUI on the device it does indeed say the device is no longer connected to the cloud. After I reboot windows, however, the device "automagically" returns to the cloud console (listed under new devices), and the local GUI shows that it is remotely managed. Do I have to uninstall EAM to really remove it from the cloud ? Is this a bug ? Right now, the cloud management seems to be a bit too overzealous/persistent/sticky 😄
  3. When I switch to downloading the installers with signatures, the download works OK. Has the download of the small packages without signatures been canceled/abandoned ? If so, can I safely manually delete the outdated "EmsisoftAntiMalwareSmallSetupXX.msi" files from "C:\ProgramData\Emsisoft Enterprise Console\Download\Server" and "C:\ProgramData\Emsisoft Enterprise Console\Share\Server" ?
  4. It seems like EEC currently fails to update the MSI installer packages for deployment. This seems to have been the case for quite some time now (didn't bother to look at the logs until now). The logs are full of errors (404) and manually clicking on the "Update" button in EEC's settings yields the same result. The deployable MSI packages are stuck at version 2019.3.1. Is there a server problem ? Thanks, raynor
  5. Dear Emsisoft Team, right now, using the behaviour blocker, you could locally add an application rule that blocks a certain exe file. However, the current implementation lacks flexibility: 1) The application blocking rules CAN NOT be set using the Enterprise Console or the Cloud Console. There is no option for that. Rules can only be set using the local client UI (Protection--> Behaviour Blocker --> Add Application Rule), which is not suitable for enterprise usage. 2) Wildcards CAN NOT be used, e.g. blocking file extensions such as "*.hta" or "*.scr" is not possible 3) Hash rules and blocking program execution in entire directories (path rules) is not possible either Please let me kindly suggest that you improve the behaviour blocker and turn it into a real application control solution that can be centrally managed using EEC or the Cloud Console. Similar to what e.g. F-Secure and Kaspersky already offer: --> https://community.f-secure.com/t5/Protection/Application-Control-2-0/td-p/105812 --> "In Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, administrators can configure startup blocking policies for applications, executable modules (PE-files, exe, scr, dll) and scripts executed via a variety of interpreters (com, bat, cmd, ps1, vbs, js, msi, msp, mst, ocx, appx, reg, jar, mmc, hta, sys). For this, the administrator inventories applications on user computers and receives their list with metadata (vendor, certificate, name, version, installation path etc.) If new applications appear on hosts later, these are also inventoried." My reasoning behind this request: Right now, we are using Software Restriction Policies (SRP) to control the startup of some unwanted applications and file types (e.g. mshta.exe, *.hta, etc.). However, SRP has been deprecated by Microsoft starting with Windows 10 v1803. It still works, but who knows when MS will finally remove it. So SRP obviously is not a future-proof solution. Its successor, AppLocker, can only be used with Windows 10 Enterprise and Education, and is more complicated to set up and administer. So it is not an option for small companies which use Windows 10 Professional. Certainly this is not an ultra-urgent feature request (as SRP is still working), but it would be much appreciated if you could put this on your middle- to tong-term roadmap. After all, I believe that much of the technology required is very likely already contained in the current behaviour blocker, it just is not exposed via any UI that allows for flexible configuration. Thanks and best regards, Raynor
  6. Thanks Frank, your reply was very helpful. Cheers! Raynor
  7. Could I get a quick reply on my two little questions please ☺️🤗 By the way: I have noticed that workspaces cannot be deleted. I assume this feature will be added later? Thanks! Raynor
  8. I just started playing around with the new "My Emsisoft Cloud Console". My first experiences have been quite positive. 🙂 Two little things that I would like to suggest for improvement: 1) I use only one policy for the whole network (i.e. workspace). This is why I delete all computer groups except "New Computers" (which cannot be deleted). I then set all required policy settings/options on the highest possible level, which is the "root" group called "Workspace". These settings are then of course inherited by the "New Computers" group (and possibly some other groups that I might add later). The problem is that whenever you re-visit the "Protection Policies" section by clicking in the navigation bar on the left hand side, the view defaults to the "New Computers" group. So if I'm not very careful, I'll change settings in this group instead of the root group "Workspace". It would be nice if the selection could default to "Workspace" whenever you re-visit the Protection Policies section. 2) Using the Enterprise Console, it was easy to see at a glance if the settings on some client PCs deviated from the original policy setting (the overview in EEC then shows a little round arrow next to the policy name in the "Computer Policy" column). In the cloud console, you must have a detailed look at the settings of each client PC to see if there is anything different to the original policy. It would be very helpful to be able to see policy vs. current client settings differences directly on the overview dashboard. (please bring back the round arrow 😉) Furthermore, there are some minor cosmetic issues: - When clicking on the menu of the root protection group "Workspace", the menu item "Clone" is not greyed out. It is clickable, but (as expected) nothing happens. It should be greyed out like the rest of this group's menu items. - Some German translations don't fit into the UI (mostly on buttons) - When using browser zoom (I use 120% by default) some lines around some UI fields get cut off And two final questions: - I was wondering what the setting "Detect registry policy settings" in the Scanner Settings section does (see attached screenshot). -Why does my license vanish from the "Licenses --> Personal Licenses" section after assigning it to a workspace ? Is this by design? This seems confusing to me... What happens if I delete a workspace - will the license be returned to the "Personal Licenses" section? What about client PCs that are NOT associated with the workspace - will they have licensing problems (I don't want to add all my PCs to the workspace)? Thanks for the great job so far! Raynor
  9. 1) OK, nice 😁 PS What about a dedicated "cloud console beta" section in the forum 😋 EDIT: Thanks for consolidating the various beta sub-forums into a more general "Beta Community" forum.
  10. Hi Frank, thanks for the quick reply. Overall this sounds like a good plan. 1) Any hint on how this might work (as there won't be a local, centrally installed proxy on a server anymore...) 2) OK, not a big problem IMHO 😀 I will definitely do some testing in the near future 👍
  11. Ha! Thought so, thanks Suggestion: why not add this little bit of info to the explanatory text, that might save other users from having the same question/confusion.
  12. With the new cloud-based console ("My Emsisoft workspaces") in BETA, I was wondering what the future holds for the "classic" (i.e. locally installed) EEC. Having deployed EEC in my company, we might want to migrate to the cloud-based console at some point in the future, but certainly not before it has become utterly reliable and stable. For how long (rougly) is the classic EEC going to be supported in the future? Oh, and two additional question that have crossed my mind: 1) What about the local update caching proxy that is supplied by EEC? How is this feature going to be transferred to cloud-managed installations? Are you planning some kind of peer-to-peer update caching similar to the Delivery Optimization feature of Windows 10? 2) Is there going to be a way to import profiles from EEC to the cloud console (including perhaps automatically transferring locally managed clients to being cloud-managed)? That would ease the transition process quite considerably... Thanks! Raynor
  13. Quick Question: I just had a look around the "My Emsisoft" account settings and stumbled across the new option "Enable two-factor authentication" (see attached screenshot). I was wondering: What's the second factor ? How is this supposed to work exactly ? I would perhaps like to enable it, but I wouldn't want to risk locking myself if things go wrong... Thanks!
  14. I've been digging a bit into methods for securing PowerShell, and the following question has come to my mind: Does EAM use the new Windows 10 scanning interface called "AMSI" to scan PowerShell scripts for malicious code when they are executed ? For more info on what I'm talking about please refer to: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/poshchap/2015/10/16/security-focus-defending-powershell-with-the-anti-malware-scan-interface-amsi/ Judging from the following post it seems that this might be the case, but I'm looking for a definite confirmation. https://support.emsisoft.com/topic/29757-new-in-20187-improved-file-guard-performance/ Thanks :)
  15. Thanks for this confirmation Jonathan. I thought I was going crazy. @Emsisoft: Please let me kindly ask that the process of verifying the client certificates is reviewed with regard to EEC's/EAM's behaviour after upgrading to a new semi-annual Windows version. I would really appreciate if this issue could get squashed once and for all. Thanks ☺️
  16. Please also add a configuration option to Emsisoft Enterprise Console to allow supressing/disabling this prompt. I wouldn't want it to be shown to the users in the company I work for, as we use other means for malicious website protection. Thanks ☺️
  17. *Bump* Sorry for being so persistent 😀, but I find it hard to believe that we are the only ones suffering from this issue. Why ? because our Server 2016 is totally run-of-the-mill, nothing fancy, no special configuration at all. Just one server (fresh install, about one year ago), acting as Domain Controller for a bunch of workstations, and as a file server, and hosting the EEC. No additional firewalls/proxies/security appliances running in the network. As I said, no fancy stuff 😆 Please let me reiterate my question: If the "Server certificate verification" fails according to the EAM log on the clients after upgrading Windows to a newer semi-annual build, something on the clients must have changed in a way that the certificate is no longer valid. I don't think that the server could be the culprit, as nothing whatsoever has changed on the server side. Again, any help would be greatly appreciated, as the current situation is quite unsatisfactory. Thanks Raynor
  18. Uh, any plans / ETA for a fix ? Speedy updates after the computer starts are very important IMHO... You know, people tend to start checking their emails right after startup, opening all kinds of attachments with viruses in them 😋 Thanks 🤗
  19. We have just started upgrading a few clients from v1803 to v1809 for testing purposes. At the moment they are running EAM 2018.8.1 (delayed feed). Our Server 2016 is running the latest EEC version. The issue still persists. Clients are losing connectionto EEC after upgrading to v1809. Manually reconnecting the clients from the EAM User Interface is necessary and works flawlessly and instantly... The EAM Logs say: Connection with Emsisoft Enterprise Console SERVERNAME:8082 failed. 276: Server certificate verification failed. Connection aborted. Any insights ? What could cause the certificate verification to fail ? We really need to get this fixed, we can't run around manually reconnecting each and every client from now until forever 😪 Thanks! Raynor
  20. Thanks for the info. According to the reports 2018.8 should still be fine
  21. Unfortunately I don't have a test environment up and running at the moment, sorry. But thanks for the heads-up about the surf protection. I might disable it using the enterprise console as an extra security measure. But the issue of the surf protection interfering with SQL connections must really be thouroughly solved before switching the delayed feed to a newer version (see above).
  22. An das Emsisoft-Team: bitte stellen Sie sicher, dass die SQL-Verbindungsprobleme und alle anderen Netzwerkverbindungsprobleme 100% vollständig gelöst sind bevor der verzögerte Updatefeed ("delayed feed") von 2018.6 auf eine neuere Version umgestellt wird. SQL-Datenbankverbindungen sind für uns in der Firma von größter Wichtigkeit, und selbst kleinste Störungen in dem Bereich würden dazu führen, dass ich wie ein Depp dastehe. Warum ? Weil ich derjenige war, der sich dafür eingesetzt hat, unsere vorheriges Antivirus mit EAM zu ersetzen, indem ich überall erzählt habe wie toll und problemfrei EAM doch sei. Softwarestabilität ist für uns von äußerster Bedeutung, daher benutzen wir auch nur den verzögerten Updatefeed. Und wenn der auf eine problematische Version ungestellt wird, dann gute Nacht! Dann müsste EAM sofort verschwinden von allen Rechnern. Liebes Emsisoft-Team, bitte lasst mich nicht im Stich 🤗
  23. There are more reports of SQL disconnection issues in the German forum even with v2018.9.2.8988 . The delayed feed version 2018.6 is reported to work fine. https://support.emsisoft.com/topic/30051-sql-verbindungsabbrüche-über-odbc/ Please make sure that all these issues are fully and thoroughly fixed before even considering switching the delayed feed to anything newer than 2018.6! SQL server connections are mission-critical in our company, and we depend on software reliability. This is why we are useing the delayed feed. If the delayed feed was switched to version that causes SQL connection issues, my bosses would pretty much kill me leading to me probably having to ditch EAM as a security solution altogether. I put my reputation on the line by telling everybody how great EAM was and that we should therefore switch to EAM as our security suite. Please do not let me down 😥 This does not seem to be the case unfortunately...
  24. Good. Thanks for the clarification. Then the info given by MS is false 😁... and this will not be as big an issue as I thought it might be. 👍
  • Create New...