Fabian Wosar

Emsisoft Employee
  • Content Count

    4703
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

383 Excellent

9 Followers

About Fabian Wosar

  • Rank
    Forum Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

607 profile views
  1. You can technically just remove all entries from your hosts file using Notepad. Just delete everything except the "127.0.0.1 localhost" entry if there is any. Lines starting with "#" are comments by the way. Pretty much. We are not an ad blocker, no. You use uBlock Origin which is pretty much the best adblocker you can get. So you are well covered in that area already. Correct. When you try to click the link, it will block access to the site. But I do understand that a lot of people would like to know before they click, which is why we consider adding it. Interestingly enough WOT got in trouble for the very same thing that some AVs are doing with their extension. You can always set up your own DNS server locally or in a cheap VPS box online. DNS also can be tunneled via various secure protocols (DNS-over-HTTPS for example). Those use methods that provide k-anonymity. Firefox in addition also sends "fake" requests if I remember correctly so the hoster of the block list does not know whether that was a website you actually surfed to or a random request. If you are so concerned, just host your own VPN. Get a cheap VPS with bitcoin at njal.la for example, host OpenVPN and your own DNS server on it and there will be no link between you and the VPS. It's serious overkill though.
  2. uBlock is exceptionally good at removing duplicate filter rules. So if you enable the MVPS filter list there, it will only enable it for stuff that isn't covered by other lists. That's also why in the rules list it says "x used out of y". Because it tells you how many rules it actually used out of that filter list. The rest was already covered by other lists. uBlock is also a lot more efficient as parsing and applying these filter rules than the DNS API in Windows is, which is the component that parses the "hosts" file. Depending on the browser you use, the "hosts" file may actually get ignored entirely. Some browsers like Chrome, for example, implemented their own, faster DNS client as the Windows DNS API isn't the fastest. So in the worst case scenario, you were having this huge hosts file, slowing down every program that does remotely something with networking, while at the same time your browser completely ignored it. Yeah, most people aren't aware of it and it is the main reason why we decided to create our own browser extension. The worst part is, that it is completely unnecessary from a technical point of view as well. But yeah, as it is often the case: If something a free, you pay with your data. Unfortunately not. If you find one, let me know which one and I can check how intrusive it is for you though. We are also considering adding search indicators in our extension. So you may want to wait for that. There is no ETA though.
  3. Just don't. You will hurt your general performance considerably. Better to just enable the MVPS filter list in uBlock. Kind of pointless. uBlock does a better job. Ad hosts blocked by uBlock can't set cookies in the first place. That's all it pretty much does if you are using Firefox. For someone who is concerned about their privacy it is interesting that you willingly send your entire surf history to any company in clear text: Literally every single website you browse to will get submitted in that way. Bitdefender Traffic Light isn't the only extension that does this. Other extensions known to do this are Avira Browser Safety, Avast Online Security, Norton Safe Web and Comodo Online Security Pro.
  4. We decided to close down most of the support sections that saw little to no traffic or revenue. That included both Russian and Italian language sections.
  5. Sorry, der Beitrag wurde aus Versehen verschoben. Sollte jetzt wieder richtig sein. Ansonsten war die Inkludierung von Emsisoft, wie vom Autor in seinem Forum bereits bestaetigt, ein Versehen seinerseits. Wir verschicken keine vollstaendigen URLs. Wir verschicken nichtmal Domainnamen im Klartext. Wir verschicken ausschliesslich Hashes von Teilen des Domainnamens, die von uns nicht einmal zurueck in einen echten Domainnamen umgewandelt werden koennen. Die Idee ist im Endeffekt nicht, dass wir wissen wo da jemand grade rumsurft, sondern nur, dass wir genug Informationen haben um 99.9999% aller schaedlichen URLs die wir kennen auszuschliessen. Das Ziel ist die Liste an potentiell moeglichen schaedlichen URLs soweit zu reduzieren, dass es praktikabel ist sie zurueck an den Browser zu schicken, damit dieser dann schauen kann ob sich der User grade auf einer bekannt schaedlichen Seite aufhaelt.
  6. You can use these two sites: http://malwaretest.emsisoft.com http://phishingtest.emsisoft.com Both of them should be blocked as malicious websites by both the surf protection as well as the extension.
  7. It depends on the type of scan. There seems to be some issue with scans using both Direct Disk Access and Alternate Data Stream scans on some systems. We are currently looking into it.
  8. Das Problem wird mit dem naechsten Programupdate, welches sich bereits in der Beta befindet, behoben.
  9. Anything above 2 GB is probably okay.
  10. https://blog.emsisoft.com/en/30775/emsisoft-anti-malware-2018-3-beta/
  11. Other companies have 10 to 100 times the number of employees we do. Having one person there that fixes bugs in Windows Insider builds isn't much of an issue there. However, us doing that would mean ~30% of all development time disappears to keep a couple of hobbyists happy who use a system that is not intended for use in production systems on their production system. We do include insider builds in our QA runs, so we know if or what is broken so we can fix it in time for a release. But unless something is fundamentally broken, risking system security or stability, we won't fix bugs specific to insider builds before a release to web is close.
  12. In general, we don't pay much attention to the insider builds until they are closing in onto a new RTW. This particular issue will be fixed in the 2018.3 release of EAM so a fix will be available in time before RS4 is officially made available to all users in early April.
  13. Fuer uns aendert sich ueberhaupt gar nichts. Unsere verhaltensbasierte Erkennung ist gegen alle Arten von Obfuscation immun, da sich zwar das Aussehen der Malware aendert, aber nicht ihr Verhalten.
  14. Das war schon immer so. Ist auch in unserer Privacy Policy ersichtlich: https://www.emsisoft.com/de/software/privacy/
  15. Quick scan only scans stuff that is currently running. Not files that aren't active. You will at least have to perform a Malware Scan to get your downloads scanned.