Quirky

Member
  • Content Count

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Quirky

  1. I personally wouldn't touch any Chromium-based browser. Apart from the obvious privacy issues, I never liked the limited UI and monoculture design and mentality.
  2. Caring about privacy and paying attention to browser extensions is perfectly fine, but you seem to ignore the main component: the browser. Google Chrome is possibly the worst choice you could make.
  3. For the moment only Delayed helps, but I can't complain about your support which remains excellent.
  4. Yes, you should turn it off. No, the tooltip is correct (although indeed somewhat confusing) because performance issues are most likely to come if you turn it on (= pagefile used, more disk activity, Windows becomes slower etc.). We want to use the RAM here, not the pagefile. Some confusion may arise because a user intuitively assumes that "performance issues" could be caused by the ~300MB needed by EAM so the user feels the option should be on (= less RAM used). It seems like extra, unnecessary RAM usage. But it is not. Most systems can spare 200-300MB of RAM nowadays and that option should only be enabled in critical situations, like not having enough RAM to even open and run programs, for example.
  5. Am I wrong in assuming that EAM initially decides on its own whether to enable that option or not? I seem to remember on a PC with limited memory that it was turned on by default. Tarnak, if you have enough memory you should let EAM use it and leave that option disabled - everything will work better this way.
  6. I also confirm an unusual amount of issues (already reported) with some programs crashing or displaying high CPU usage, all caused by the recent EAM updates. 2018.8 is fine. Excluding/disabling doesn't work (this makes me wonder about the effectiveness of these options), only a full EAM uninstall does, or a switch to 2018.8.
  7. That is not a given at all. They are very different browsers now and distance in only growing. Such a "merge" might not even be applicable due to the aforementioned differences, both in underlying technology and even developer mentality. In any case, we will see. Now Surf Protection works, as always. The future? No one can predict that.
  8. Try Pale Moon, one of the few sane browsers left. Zero issues with Surf Protection, too.
  9. Chiming in about the new UI: 1. I use 125% DPI. The UI window (2018.8.1) needs to be much larger (almost full screen) in order to contain most of the information it did before the update. This also applies when using the "slim icon-only bar to keep it as compact as possible". I'm sorry but what I read at the beginning here is simply not true - or does not apply at all on my system. 2. The scrolling: it does not "make things more user-friendly", because: unless fully memorised, you don't really know where settings are. You have to keep scrolling to find them. I've mentioned it elsewhere, it's an "eyes" issue, not just personal preference and all this extra scrolling (on an almost full-screen UI no less) makes the whole thing very uncomfortable. Really sorry that I can't report anything positive about it. In the years I've been using EIS/EAM, I don't recall any "feature reversions" so I can only suggest this: please consider the use of themes/skins etc. so that we could have the previous, "steady" UI as an option.
  10. I'd give them a bit more credit than that!
  11. But WFC is not a firewall -totally unrelated to Online Armor and even EIS- and it'd make an excellent in-built companion to EAM which actually promotes the Windows Firewall. Anyway, I guess it's too late for that.
  12. I don't think it's currently digitally signed: No more code-signing options
  13. I've enabled that option and it seems to lock apps more consistently now, but I'll need to test a bit more.
  14. Same device and Android version. No other security app (All-In-One-Toolbox is installed), EMS 3.2.1 with admin access. I also see a notification access option with only EMS as an option (disabled). Should that be enabled? I don't have any apps that apply power-saving except for what Android itself does.
  15. I now use the 'Unlock until screen off' option but Apps are not locked consistently. I often open Gmail for example after turning on the device and it opens nornally, no pin asked. I'd say 4 out of 10 times, the lock doesn't work as expected.
  16. Open regedit and check your registry: Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Piriform\Agomo If the Agomo entry is there then you are probably infected (your PC, that is). Just delete the Agomo key and install the latest CCleaner which will overwrite the infected .exe. A full PC scan can't hurt either. If Agomo is not there, you should be fine. https://www.ghacks.net/2017/09/18/ccleaner-compromised-better-check-your-pc/
  17. I think you misunderstood me, hjlbx. I'm talking about a simple monitor of the WF status, as reported by Windows (an additional check wouldn't hurt either, if feasible). If you disable the WF yourself the usual, standard Control Panel way (why mess with cmd/PowerShell?) there will be no reaction from EAM. It will still say "Your computer is protected" - all green status.
  18. Since there's a tighter relation now between EAM and the Windows Firewall (and internet security in general), perhaps EAM should warn when the WF is off? Unless I'm mistaken there's no warning from EAM if the WF is turned off. So, it seems odd to only warn when a program wants to add WF rules, but not when the WF is completely disabled.
  19. I doubt you will have to manually enable it yourself. It will be automatically enabled. If for some wild reason it will be disabled, Windows and EAM will tell you to enable it but I'm sure it will be done automatically. When a 3rd-party Firewall is uninstalled, the Windows Firewall kicks in automatically.
  20. No, it disables various privacy-related settings (Microsoft's own) but it does not add Firewall rules or block specific connections. You'll have to check more advanced tools for that, like W10Privacy, WindowsSpyBlocker and WPD. They are all excellent, but make sure you know what you are doing before using/applying them.
  21. It's not really a merge though, is it? EAW: improved, but without getting any of EIS's extra features, so a massive downgrade in Firewall control, not a merge EIS: discontinued EAW users should be happy, EIS users are essentially being told to either use other software (because "there weren't many of them EIS users anyway") or trust Microsoft's Windows Firewall and its feeble interface. The actual merge is between EAW and Microsoft Windows Firewall, not EAM and EIS.
  22. About rule self-cleaning, I'd like to ask if this is also valid for scanning/monitoring exclusions. For example, if I've added a folder/file exclusion that it's no longer there (the excluded file or folder), would the exclusion be auto-removed at some point?
  23. Thanks GT500, but that includes application rules ("Application and global firewall rules"). From a quick look in the exported a2rules.ini file, the application and firewall rules are mixed so it's not easy to separate them. Perhaps copy/pasting firewall-only rules into a separate a2rules.ini file might work for importing them, I don't know.
  24. Thank you, commas and ranges work fine. Hope you can consider adding an option to export/import Firewall rules only, separate from the Application rules (unless there's a way?). Firewall rules should be easy to transfer to another PC but with the Application rules included in a2rules.ini, it doesn't seem like a good idea to try (32/64-bit systems/paths, different applications etc.)
  25. Thanks Ken1943, yes I know about the Surf Protection file import and mentioned it. The main question though is whether the Firewall is supposed to do this instead for better protection and if so, in what way. Also, other threads suggest that Surf Protection does not work globally and since AppContainer is not supported, I am guessing Windows 8 and especially Windows 10 are not fully covered by Surf Protection (not talking about Edge, but W10 as a whole). I'm not technical on this stuff, just asking.