E TRUST av. v7 promo, how good is it?

[zorrito]

Can someone tell me:
Is it data base big enaugh to protect my pc?
Is it good enaugh against trojans, virus and worms?
Is its euristics good?
How good are its unpackers?
Until when can I use it, could it be until next may/2004?
Is it one of the best 5 antivirus programs?
Thanks for answering!!! ::)

[JayK]

Yes
Yes
yes
yes
don't know
maybe

[minacross]

I am wondering the same questions about how good is this AV..
check my post here http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=15396
in other words, which is better Avast4 or eTrust 7 promo - regarding virus/trojan detection detection - as they both are freeware ? ??? ??? ???

[illukka]

well it's both (vet/inoculate it)engines got vb 100% award last june..
then there is this: http://www.check-mark.com/cgi-bin/redirect.pl
CA scores big on the corporate market so i think it must be a very capable product.... i remember that there was a lot of discussion when it first came out

[groundling]

Minacross:
Perhaps this thread may be of interest:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8243847~root=security,1~mode=flat

Edit:
Excuse me , the link doesn't work . But I will copy and paste one part of it:
Hi everyone, here you have a summary of an independent av-test made by checkvir.com 7 & 8-2003!

CHECKVIR.COM 7-2003 av-test Win 98/XP;

checked total 3150 different SCRIPT infections:

detected - missed - scanner

-1. 3145 ---- 5 --- F-secure 5.41
-2. 3143 ---- 7 --- Kaspersky AV 4.5.0.45
-3. 3085 --- 65 --- Etrust 7.0.139
-4. 3072 --- 78 --- Norton AV 2003 9.05.15
-4. 3072 --- 78 --- Norton AV Corporate 8.1.0.825
-6. 3055 --- 95 --- TrendMicro Office Scan 5.5
-7. 2976 -- 174 --- Sophos AV 3.71
-8. 2958 -- 192 --- VirusBuster for Win 4.2 (Build 24)
-9. 2943 -- 207 --- Panda AV Platinum 7.04.00
10. 2790 -- 360 --- DrWeb 4.29c
11. 2214 -- 936 --- Norman VirusControl 5.6.0

Sorry for the second hand info.


Added URL tags

[minacross]

-{ Quote: " quoting: groundling link=board=24;threadid=15423;start=0#msg96289 date=1067184150]
Minacross:
Perhaps this thread may be of interest:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8243847~root=security,1~mode=flat

Edit:
Excuse me , the link doesn't work . But I will copy and paste one part of it:
Hi everyone, here you have a summary of an independent av-test made by checkvir.com 7 & 8-2003!
Sorry for the second hand info.


Added URL tags
" }-
it is working now ;)
thanx groundling ;D

[DolfTraanberg]

If you want good protection, you should NEVER rely on an AV to detect Trojans or Worms.
Dolf

[zorrito]

I see this is a good AV, but until when can I use it for free?There are good anti-trojan and anti-virus programs like KAV and DR.WEB and I hope this AV(E-TRUST)does a good job if it has a good base (dr.web has more than 40 000 and KAV almost 80 000), how much does it have?

[Chuck57]

I don't know the virus database, but presumably etrust 7 promo is good 'forever,' whatever that means in the AV industry. My guess is it will be valid until a newer version comes out.

I've used etrust 7 promo for several months now and, except for the fact that I have to update manually (I've never been able to get the auto update to work) I am very happy with it. It's also on my wife's machine now, after having to format her hard drive because AVG missed a virus and wrecked her hard drive. Since loading it, it's caught a couple of viruses and saved her. I've had none try to sneak into my computer.

I like having the two engines, InoculateIT and Vet and switch them off every week or two. It's a good one.

[minacross]

-{ Quote: " quoting: zorrito link=board=24;threadid=15423;start=0#msg96428 date=1067229729]
I see this is a good AV, but until when can I use it for free?There are good anti-trojan and anti-virus programs like KAV and DR.WEB and I hope this AV(E-TRUST)does a good job if it has a good base (dr.web has more than 40 000 and KAV almost 80 000), how much does it have?
" }-
all I can find is the Newly Detected Viruses Since the Last Virus Signature Update
(http://support.ca.com/techbases/ilnt/31033.html)

[fryr]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Chuck57 link=board=24;threadid=15423;start=0#msg96536 date=1067271542]
I have to update manually (I've never been able to get the auto update to work)
" }-
I have found that modifying the INODIST.INI sorts out auto updates :-

INODIST.INI
=========
[SOURCES]
1=FTP_0
;2=UNC_0
;3=LOC_0

[FTP_0]
Method=FTP
HostName=ftpav.ca.com
UserName=anonymous
UserPassword=Somebody@somecompany.com
FastConnection=0
ProxyName=
UpdatePath=/pub/inoculan/scaneng/

[UNC_0]
Method=UNC
Path=\\Machine\Share\Path
UserName=User
UserPassword=Password

[LOC_0]
Method=LOCAL
Path=C:\InoculateIt\out

[GET]
;1=SIG_1_3
;2=SIG_2_3
;3=SIG_1_4
;4=SIG_2_4
;5=SIG_2_8
;6=SIG_2_9

[SIG_1_3]
Engine=INOCULATEIT
OS=Windows 9x/ME

[SIG_2_3]
Engine=VET
OS=Windows 9x/ME

[SIG_1_4]
Engine=INOCULATEIT
OS=Windows NT/2000 (x86)

[SIG_2_4]
Engine=VET
OS=Windows NT/2000 (x86)

[SIG_2_8]
Engine=INOCULATEIT
OS=Linux (Intel)

[SIG_2_9]
Engine=INOCULATEIT
OS=Sun Solaris

[POLICY]
UpdateLocalSignatures=1
SignatureHoldTime=0
MakeIncDownloading=1
IsDistributionServer=0

[OSID]
Linux (Intel)=8
Sun Solaris=9
;Windows 3x/Netware=2
Windows 9x/ME=3
Windows NT/2000 (x86)=4

[ENGINEID]
INOCULATEIT=1
VET=2

[zonnet]

Do the vet/inoculate it engines work simultaneously without interfering or do you have to use one or the other?
Thanks

[groundling]

You can pick one to run real time, the other for on demand. Only runs one at a time.

[zonnet]

Which one is the best to run real time?

[Barney]

This antivirus is more trouble than it's worth. I have tested this so called promo version and still the stupid definition links don't work. This is the oldest trick in the book - offer a free version of a program missing a key feature. You get so fed up with manually downloading the definitions that you end up buying it in the end. Anyway, this is not a product that I'm all that impressed with to begin with (slow and laggy) - nothing like the former "Inoculate It" AV. That was a real slim, quick, powerhouse of an antivirus. They just kept adding to it till they crippled it. This just strengthens my belief that KAV and DRWEB are the real Antivirus kingpins. Ok, NOD32 is also pretty good (I'll give it a distant third). Just my opinion, don't take offense people. If you have any feedback, please speak up. I would love to hear other opinions on this matter.

Barney.

[solarpowered candle]

Barney perhaps you should delete it and reinstall it
. My promo works fine and the downloads are automatic . Its very easy going on my system and I only have a win 98se 128 ram for my home pc. Iv tried nearly all the anti virus out there over the last few years and I have to say its a great anti virus . Its always choice , some just dont work that well where others work fine on your system . I guess you just have to search around to find the one thats best for you .
I initially had download problems , however Im not convinced it was e Trusts problem , I eventually redownloaded and changed my firewall ( I now use EZ firewall) and can now get the downloads working (automatically) Anyways good luck , I am very happy with e Trust promo and I hope you may be able to sort it out , or at least find another one that works well for you ..

[solarpowered candle]

-{ Quote: " quoting: zonnet link=board=24;threadid=15423;start=0#msg97487 date=1067638613]
Which one is the best to run real time?
" }-
Hi Zonnet , I use InoculateIT for one week and then Vet the next for my "Real time monitor"
When I run the local scanner on my system i usually run both . First Vet then Inoculate . ( I do this a few times a week at least )
:)

[nameless]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Dollefie link=board=24;threadid=15423;start=0#msg96425 date=1067229057]
If you want good protection, you should NEVER rely on an AV to detect Trojans or Worms." }-

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't any decent "anti-virus" product be very capable at detecting worms and trojans? I say this because I've not heard of true viruses being a real threat anymore; the biggest concern, by far, seems to be from trojans and worms.

In light of this, my own opinion is that any anti-virus product that isn't very good at detecting the real threats is next to worthless. This is exactly why I migrated away from EZ-AntiVirus awhile back. It was great for detecting true viruses, but awful at detecting trojans (I cannot speak to the efficacy of the current version of EZ-AntiVirus with regard to trojans and worms).

[spydespiser]

Hi nameless


-{ Quote: "Please correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't any decent "anti-virus" product be very capable at detecting worms and trojans? " }-

Some do to some extent but it is always better to have dedicated programs

AV for virii
AT for trojans

[nameless]

Five of the top ten threats listed on Trend Micro's site (http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/default.asp?sect=TT) are worms or trojans. It seems to me that literal "anti-virus" protection is very inadequate, and there must be an awful lot of junky products out there, if so many of them miss half of the top threats in the wild.

I agree that it makes good security sense to run an anti-trojan detector alongside an anti-virus detector. I'm just lamenting the fact that some anti-virus vendors appear to have their head in the sand. To me, a company that makes an anti-malware product that focuses only on true viruses is like a helmet company making a product that covers only the left side of your head!

[solarpowered candle]

Just to point out how good the eTrust v7 promo , that some of us are freely using is

CA’s eTRUST ANTIVIRUS V7 WINS COMPUTING MAGAZINE’s SECURITY PRODUCT OF THE YEAR
ISLANDIA, N.Y. and DITTON PARK, UK, October 23, 2003 - Computer Associates International, Inc. (CA) today announced that eTrust Antivirus v7 won “Security Product of the Year” in Computing's Awards for Excellence 2003.

eTrust Antivirus was selected by 14 analysts, editors, and European business executives for its empowerment of business. Evaluation criteria included innovation, functionality, performance and price. The Computing awards promote high standards of achievement and serve as a benchmark for excellence.

Part of CA's acclaimed family of eTrust security solutions, eTrust Antivirus reduces the risk of business-interrupting virus infections with its dual virus-scanning engines and its simplified and automated updating, flexible administration, and enforcement of security polices.

eTrust Antivirus has been certified by ICSA Labs and West Coast Labs, and CA has received a record 33 Virus Bulletin “VB 100%” awards for detecting 100% of viruses “in-the-wild.” eTrust Antivirus is supported by CA's worldwide eTrust Threat Analysis and Response Global Emergency Team (TARGET), which provides around-the-clock monitoring and protection against the latest viruses and blended threats.

“This award demonstrates that CA truly understands not only the technical requirements of antivirus but the operational and administrative challenges facing corporate security managers,” said Chris Devlin, CA European general manager, Channels. “CA will continue to deliver security solutions that meet the real world needs of our customers and enable them to address a growing range of threats.”

About CA

Computer Associates International, Inc. (NYSE:CA), one of the world's largest software companies, delivers software and services that enable organizations to manage their IT environments. Focus areas include network and systems management, storage and security management, portal and business intelligence, and application life cycle management. Founded in 1976, CA is headquartered in Islandia, NY, and operates in more than 100 countries. For more information on CA, please visit http://ca.com.

[nameless]

EZA has always been great at file infector detection, but always sucked at trojan detection. How does EZA fare in that area now?

[solarpowered candle]

there is only one anti virus that i honestly would feel comfortable with , to deal with trojan
z and wormz as well as virus and thats Kaspersky.
I also have TDS3.with my e Trustv7 . I have not ever had a virus or a trojan on this system . Im not sure how effective VET or Inoculate IT are in providing trojan and malware protection , however apparantly in the real world out there they are good. With my surfing habits I would be comfortable with only e Trust v7 . I havent heard of anyone falling pray to any trojanz or wormz as of yet who are running v7 .

[nameless]

Kaspersky just failed the June, 2003 WinXP test by Virus Bulletin (http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/tests.xml?200306) (for whatever that's worth, and I'm not saying it's worth anything).

[nameless]

OK, I've managed to download two different, ummm... "flavors" of EZA 7. One file name is "eav7trial_windows.exe", and it is 22.7-MB in size, and the other is "eav7promo.exe", which is 15.6-MB in size. Why would there be such a huge difference in size? What's the difference here?

Also, I assume that the "eav7trial_windows.exe" will time-out after 30 days, while the "eav7promo.exe" will not. Then again, the version of EZA meant for home users is 6, not 7.

Someone, please help un-confound me! :-\

Edit: Maybe the extra size is due to the inclusion of anti-piracy code? ???

[solarpowered candle]

yep. the promo v7 is 15 mbs , that is the one that we have who are using promo free version.
The 21 mb 30 day trial version I have not utilised , but maybe it comes with all the virus definitions upto date , ( only guessing here- massively)
The v6 has only one engine . Its possibly now Vet , where as it use to be InoculateIT ( guessing massively here also from some thing that Calamity jane posted once.)
Also just for abit of goss the EZ firewall now has the desktop protection incorporated into it , where as previously it was a separate entity .(this is virtually the same as Zonealarm with cookie control and add blocking and mobile code control . :)

[solarpowered candle]

Here is another interesting article from PC Magazine in Denmark which rates anti virus products for the corporate network placing e Trust at #1 http://www.my-etrust.com/PC%20world%20test1.pdf

[Asbro]

Once upon a time there was ..........
I am just finished repairing a Win2k PC infected by virus with no Antivirus program installed.

At first I didn't know the problems was caused by virus so the original Win2k installation was altered by a System Repair from CD.

Next I tried with a demo of Avast4. It detected the VALLA virus but couldn't cure a single file. I tried to move some of the files but stopped the proces. -- I could not see anywhere where these files was moved from. -- This program was moved very quickly, not to be used on any of my PC´s again.

Then I tried a new retail version of Norton AV 2004. It comes with a nice manual and with a bootable CD.
I first tried directly from the CD with the result that this PC has no viruses as it could not find my NTFS HDD.
As this did not work out I tryed to install the program normally. Norton AV strictly demanded IExplorer v501 sp2, but by the original system repair the IExplorer was set back to version 5.0. I tried to install IExplorer v6.0, but caused by hevy virus infection this was not possible.
(Why the "#¤*%" demand a browser, for what ? -- KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid !!!).

Then at last I found the link to the free CA ETrust AV promo program. I downloaded it and installed it right the way on 4 min. I downloaded and copied manually the signature files. After reboot the Realtime service poped up that it was infected by virus and sugested to run a Virus check.
I started the eTrust AV program in standard InculanIt mode and it found and cured right the way 1054 infected files from total 59018 files on the disk:

1052 Win32/Valla
1 lioten.Z.Worm
1 IRCBot.Netd32.Trojan

185 Windows system files was strangly not cured fx:
notepad.exe and cmd.exe
A new Windows system repair from CD renewed the system files.

A new virus scan now in Vet mode found and repaired 1 last file.

The eTrust AV program, did the job, it even run on my Win2k server, and it is FREE too. I certanly like it.

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: nameless link=board=24;threadid=15423;start=15#msg97924 date=1067735277]
Five of the top ten threats listed on Trend Micro's site (http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/default.asp?sect=TT) are worms or trojans. It seems to me that literal "anti-virus" protection is very inadequate, and there must be an awful lot of junky products out there, if so many of them miss half of the top threats in the wild.

" }-

LOL, and I bet almost every "antivirus" in the world can detect those. Your problem is that you are too hung up on the distinction betweem worms/trojans/viruses. Many are combinations of all 3. And besides, I have never head an antivirus say "We don't do worms" :) ,

Worms/trojans/viruses, you bet if they are a threat every antivirus in the world will be able to detect them.

If you like surfing dubious sites for backdoor programs and cracks, then no, most antiviruses won't score well there.

-{ Quote: "

I agree that it makes good security sense to run an anti-trojan detector alongside an anti-virus detector. I'm just lamenting the fact that some anti-virus vendors appear to have their head in the sand. To me, a company that makes an anti-malware product that focuses only on true viruses is like a helmet company making a product that covers only the left side of your head!
" }-

To be clear Which vendor exactly are we talking about? :)

[VikingStorm]

-{ Quote: " quoting: nameless link=board=24;threadid=15423;start=15#msg97945 date=1067739800]
Kaspersky just failed the June, 2003 WinXP test by Virus Bulletin (http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/tests.xml?200306) (for whatever that's worth, and I'm not saying it's worth anything).
" }-

Didn't it fail because of a false positive? (or was that a different month)

[solarpowered candle]

-{ Quote: " quoting: VikingStorm link=board=24;threadid=15423;start=15#msg101459 date=1068871459]
-{ Quote: " quoting: nameless link=board=24;threadid=15423;start=15#msg97945 date=1067739800]
Kaspersky just failed the June, 2003 WinXP test by Virus Bulletin (http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/tests.xml?200306) (for whatever that's worth, and I'm not saying it's worth anything).
" }-



Didn't it fail because of a false positive? (or was that a different month)
" }-


As appearances go , according to the" gospel of virus bulletin" it had a false positive in their testing .
Its one great anti virus. If I had to trip down to the demons in 52nd ave and needed to trust in one application it would be kaspersky


Asbro thank you for sharing that post . And your experiences with e Trust promo.

[nameless]

I also have the impression that KAVP is the best overall way to go. (Though I admit that opinion is just gathered "from what I've heard", as I don't actually come across much malware at all myself.) This is why KAVP is my current av util, even though it really bogs the system down sometimes. :-[