Threatfire 4.1.0.9 BETA

[firzen771]

Threatfire's new beta now supports 64-bit!

Key new features:

* Smarter Alerts, Less Questions – patent-pending technology
* Support for Windows Vista 64-bit
* Updated threat detection technology


"PC Tools has recognized that traditional scanning techniques are becoming a secondary defense to sophisticated malware techniques. User feedback has also indicated that most users install ThreatFire as an added layer of protection in additional traditional anti-virus scanning software. As a result ThreatFire 4.1 no longer includes an anti-virus scanner. Users requiring an anti-virus solution should download PC Tools AntiVirus, a free solution for Windows"

"One of the changes we made, is that TF now does cloud lookup for the black and white lists as well as using the default black and white lists on your system. Basically you could delete the dbs on your system, and still not lose the benefit of black and white lists.

Let us know what you think."


- those are some quotes from the mods over at pc tools beta forum.

[rolarocka]

Nice nice. So the new TF Beta should be lighter on system ressources right?

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "Threatfire's new beta now supports 64-bit!

Key new features:

* Smarter Alerts, Less Questions – patent-pending technology
* Support for Windows Vista 64-bit
* Updated threat detection technology


"PC Tools has recognized that traditional scanning techniques are becoming a secondary defense to sophisticated malware techniques. User feedback has also indicated that most users install ThreatFire as an added layer of protection in additional traditional anti-virus scanning software. As a result ThreatFire 4.1 no longer includes an anti-virus scanner. Users requiring an anti-virus solution should download PC Tools AntiVirus, a free solution for Windows"

"One of the changes we made, is that TF now does cloud lookup for the black and white lists as well as using the default black and white lists on your system. Basically you could delete the dbs on your system, and still not lose the benefit of black and white lists.

Let us know what you think."


- those are some quotes from the mods over at pc tools beta forum." }-

I think this is the right direction for TF development - very welcome!

[jmonge]

-{ Quote: "I think this is the right direction for TF development - very welcome!" }-this is like the old cyberhawk is coming back to life;)

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "this is like the old cyberhawk is coming back to life;)" }-

I just installed TF 4.1.0.9 on Vista 32 bit and so far it's working fine. One thing I notice is they are still not offering a "deny" option for detected problems. I had a problem recently where TF detected a number of critical system files as infected, such as explorer.exe. I allowed TF to quarantine the files since PC Tools claims that system files will not actually be quarantined, just killed in memory and restarted, but it did in fact remove explorer.exe. I had to boot from a rescue CD to restore the file to the Windows directory. I cannot recommend TF to customers for this reason, and I use it with caution on my own PC. They really need to address this.

[raven211]

-{ Quote: "I just installed TF 4.1.0.9 on Vista 32 bit and so far it's working fine. One thing I notice is they are still not offering a "deny" option for detected problems. I had a problem recently where TF detected a number of critical system files as infected, such as explorer.exe. I allowed TF to quarantine the files since PC Tools claims that system files will not actually be quarantined, just killed in memory and restarted, but it did in fact remove explorer.exe. I had to boot from a rescue CD to restore the file to the Windows directory. I cannot recommend TF to customers for this reason, and I use it with caution on my own PC. They really need to address this." }-

It's not that I don't believe you, but they seem to not - so show them literally by capturing it. It's been brought up many times even if I've not experienced it personally, I know. What makes it trigger on explorer.exe or another critical system file in the first place? Apparently, they've not experienced this either - e.g. quarantining a completely legit and safe explorer.exe - or they would certainly do something about it.

[ghodgson]

-{ Quote: "As a result ThreatFire 4.1 no longer includes an anti-virus scanner. Users requiring an anti-virus solution should download PC Tools AntiVirus, a free solution for Windows"" }-

I have tried the PC tools AV in the past which slowed my PC to a crawl, so I would not install PC tools AV again at all.
Regarding TF without AV, fair enough.

Gordon

[Sully]

-{ Quote: "It's not that I don't believe you, but they seem to not - so show them literally by capturing it. It's been brought up many times even if I've not experienced it personally, I know. What makes it trigger on explorer.exe or another critical system file in the first place? Apparently, they've not experienced this either - e.g. quarantining a completely legit and safe explorer.exe - or they would certainly do something about it." }-

As I stated over in thier forum, I can perform a fresh install of xp pro, install TF, and every like clockwork, the first time I use explorer.exe and hit the search button, TF pops up and asks to quarantine, with only kill process or quarantine. It never repeats itself in this procedure once this happens, unless a fresh format. It might do it in a new user profile, I have not tried. I use cyberhawk, with a simple allow/deny feature so needed in TF.

Sul.

[jmonge]

-{ Quote: "I just installed TF 4.1.0.9 on Vista 32 bit and so far it's working fine. One thing I notice is they are still not offering a "deny" option for detected problems. I had a problem recently where TF detected a number of critical system files as infected, such as explorer.exe. I allowed TF to quarantine the files since PC Tools claims that system files will not actually be quarantined, just killed in memory and restarted, but it did in fact remove explorer.exe. I had to boot from a rescue CD to restore the file to the Windows directory. I cannot recommend TF to customers for this reason, and I use it with caution on my own PC. They really need to address this." }-does it have an option to white list files?black and white list?

[jmonge]

it would be a good idea to be able to white list critical system files as explorer.exe to avoid these type os situation,i hope they do some thing about cause security software is suppose to protects computers not destroy them;D

[raven211]

-{ Quote: "As I stated over in thier forum, I can perform a fresh install of xp pro, install TF, and every like clockwork, the first time I use explorer.exe and hit the search button, TF pops up and asks to quarantine, with only kill process or quarantine. It never repeats itself in this procedure once this happens, unless a fresh format. It might do it in a new user profile, I have not tried. I use cyberhawk, with a simple allow/deny feature so needed in TF.

Sul." }-

Let me guess... this has something to do with the sensitivity level, right?

I'm always running TF at its default level "3" setting - as it seems balanced by being non-intrusive, but very effective.

[jmonge]

-{ Quote: "Let me guess... this has something to do with the sensitivity level, right?

I'm always running TF at its default level "3" setting - as it seems balanced by being non-intrusive, but very effective." }-i agree with you when tf is at default level all it is ok but if you put the level to high 4 to 5 then you are in trouble8)

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "It's not that I don't believe you, but they seem to not - so show them literally by capturing it. It's been brought up many times even if I've not experienced it personally, I know. What makes it trigger on explorer.exe or another critical system file in the first place? Apparently, they've not experienced this either - e.g. quarantining a completely legit and safe explorer.exe - or they would certainly do something about it." }-

Yes, I understand the problem. In my case I was working on a customer's computer and after I hit "quarantine" the PC locked up solid. Too bad I didn't think to take a screenshot with my cell phone. When I rebooted all of the system files had been restored except for explorer.exe which was no longer in the Windows directory. I guess it's possible that the file was not a valid system file, but malware with the same name. In that case it seems that TF needs to be able to copy a legit version from a backup location to the Windows directory so the PC can boot (perhaps TF should backup these files when first installed so it can use them when necessary?). Otherwise the average user has a broken PC.

I've read the thread in the PC Tools forum and I know the developers are skeptical about this behavior, but I and the others who have experienced it have no reason to make it up. There is something going on that isn't understood yet.

[Sully]

-{ Quote: "Let me guess... this has something to do with the sensitivity level, right?

I'm always running TF at its default level "3" setting - as it seems balanced by being non-intrusive, but very effective." }-

Don't know. I just format fresh, install XP, put on TF, start explorer, hit the search button, TF pops up and says something very bad is about to occur and I should either kill explorer or quarantine it. I know it has to do with some things that are changed when this first occurs, probably something to do with search assistant or cryptography or fast indexing. Don't know and don't really care. I was just pointing out (to PCT forum) that they are full of crap if they think TF does not find a standard explorer.exe as a 'bad thing' some times. And I don't mind if it does find things like this. My argument was that it should have an allow/deny option, just for cases like that. They seem to have this attitude that experienced users like to report things just because, and take no ones word. Oh well, maybe TF without AV will prove a better product.

Sul.

[raven211]

-{ Quote: "i agree with you when tf is at default level all it is ok but if you put the level to high 4 to 5 then you are in trouble8)" }-

Yeah, that's one thing, but it's still completely wrong that it would quarantine completely legit, safe and critical system files and other critical parts of the system. Increasing sensitivity should only mean more prompts on actions - not not giving a damn about the safety of the OS operation and the software's own safety precautions.

[tsilo]

Where can I download it?

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "Where can I download it?" }-

in the public threatfire forum they only say that there is a beta and dont post a download link, so im not sure if they want the beta to be released publicly or only to people part of their beta program, someone let me know if im wrong.

[firzen771]

some added info for some questions people asked:

1. The av db was used as an extended black list.
2. The rootkit scanner is in place, but is only a rootkit, and does not use the dbs. So there is no AV/Spyware scanner in TF.
3. TF is definitely not less effective. The whole idea of these changes is to improve TF's effectiveness.
4. The duty of the local db's is to allow users to have dbs even if there is not connectivity to the net, or for some reason connectivity with TF servers are impeded (firewall, user choice etc...)
5. The overall footprint has not changed, however without the AV engine should improve TF's stability and usability.


"We did extensive analysis and found that ThreatFire was not really gaining anything from checking the AV db at the time of an alert. The vast majority of times when we were able to identify a known threat at the time of an alert it was due to information contained in TF's own blacklist, not the AV db.

Because of this, and because of additional stability issues, we made the decision to remove the AV scanner. This also allows users to run TF alongside whichever on-demand scanner they choose"

[firzen771]

well that was a unfortunate beta test, i decided to give the TF beta a shot, installation went fine, but after threatfire initialized my comp crashed, i restarted and got up to the vista loading screen, then my system auto rebooted, this process repeated over and over until i just decided to go back to the snapshot i made with Rollback Rx before i installed theatfire.

hope the guys at PC Tools can fix this prob.

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "Where can I download it?" }-

The 32 bit and 64 bit versions of 4.1.0.9 can be downloaded from this page. If this page is not available you might need to join the forum first.

http://www.pctools.com/forum/showthread.php?t=55895

[EASTER]

-{ Quote: "I just installed TF 4.1.0.9 on Vista 32 bit and so far it's working fine. One thing I notice is they are still not offering a "deny" option for detected problems. I had a problem recently where TF detected a number of critical system files as infected, such as explorer.exe. I allowed TF to quarantine the files since PC Tools claims that system files will not actually be quarantined, just killed in memory and restarted, but it did in fact remove explorer.exe. I had to boot from a rescue CD to restore the file to the Windows directory. I cannot recommend TF to customers for this reason, and I use it with caution on my own PC. They really need to address this." }-

This is critical flaw they know full well that should have already added. TF "Lies", it says it doesn't quarantine system files but take a comparison test with MAMUTU for an example.

Simply manually run a script that adds a new RUN entry in the registry or even maually do it on your own. TF offers no option to block this behavior but rather gives you the option of letting it force a RUN entry or else it quarantines as the SUSPECT file "REGEDIT". Ridiculous IMO.

On the other hand MAMUTU aborts either the behavior or if you run a script simply shuts it down.

My old Cyberhawk 1.1.1.3 simply jumps up with a DENY/ALLOW option and if you choose DENY it doesn't carry off REGEDIT to the capture bin but instead completely & effectively TERMINATES regedit if you try to add it manually, or if an app or script, TERMINATES it nicely.

That's why i always called CyberHawk a "TERMINATOR" as well as a smart interceptor/behavior blocker.

EASTER

[Sully]

Hmm. I use Cyberhawk 1113 on my computer for some time now. I made an icon on the desktop to toggle the service and tray on/off. Pretty quiet, but when it speaks I pay attention. Not the be all/end all, but good at what it does. And as you say Easter, Allow/Deny. I consider it a good lightweight tool for those who don't want a full-blown hips type app.

Sul.

[Kees1958]

Guys,

You realise thet CyberHawk 1.1.1.3 does not protect against direct disk access for instance

[EASTER]

-{ Quote: "Guys,

You realise thet CyberHawk 1.1.1.3 does not protect against direct disk access for instance" }-

Yes, and do you also know TF doesn't know how to alert on what it should be alerting to?

At least even with that limitation, Cyberhawk (old) is much more aggressive and responsive on what it does alert to, and it does alert plus offer you an option to TERMINATE! the offending app and not a system critical file or files.

If they don't get TF back on track soon, it's gonna do more than just fall out of favor.

[Sully]

-{ Quote: "Guys,

You realise thet CyberHawk 1.1.1.3 does not protect against direct disk access for instance" }-
Yes I know this. Thanks for the heads up though.

You know what I wish for is an app that is more 'basic' like CH, but on the lines of TF with a better method of allow/deny. I have used other tools, starting with Process Guard. Tweaked them etc. But I don't ever stay put once I arrive at a certain place program wise. I am constantly re-installing my OS, trying some new trick or learning how to break something so I can see how to fix it. Stupid stuff. This is just a nagging thing now to have to keep up with a firewall or hips constantly. I like to do that stuff, but have other things to focus on right now than that. That is why I use CH right now. It offers some limited protection that I feel I can use, without going to the point of spending hours researching how to tweak it for my setup that will change probably this weekend. Throw on sandboxe and vmWare, with a little imaging software, and for me I can test and play without much in way of 'nagging' from other tools.

Sul.

[andyman35]

-{ Quote: "This is critical flaw they know full well that should have already added. TF "Lies", it says it doesn't quarantine system files but take a comparison test with MAMUTU for an example.

Simply manually run a script that adds a new RUN entry in the registry or even maually do it on your own. TF offers no option to block this behavior but rather gives you the option of letting it force a RUN entry or else it quarantines as the SUSPECT file "REGEDIT". Ridiculous IMO.

On the other hand MAMUTU aborts either the behavior or if you run a script simply shuts it down.

My old Cyberhawk 1.1.1.3 simply jumps up with a DENY/ALLOW option and if you choose DENY it doesn't carry off REGEDIT to the capture bin but instead completely & effectively TERMINATES regedit if you try to add it manually, or if an app or script, TERMINATES it nicely.

That's why i always called CyberHawk a "TERMINATOR" as well as a smart interceptor/behavior blocker.

EASTER" }-

I agree totally,Mamutu is light years ahead in this respect and I'm disappointed that this beta hasn't addressed what is a serious issue.My advice to users of TF remains the same,make sure you keep an up to date disk image on hand,you will require it.

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "I agree totally,Mamutu is light years ahead in this respect and I'm disappointed that this beta hasn't addressed what is a serious issue.My advice to users of TF remains the same,make sure you keep an up to date disk image on hand,you will require it." }-

haha, dont i know it, couldnt even log on to winodws after installation let alone getting that far :P

[rdsu]

How is the current state of this beta?

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "How is the current state of this beta?" }-

not sure, havent tryed it again since my first problem and im not planning to.

[EASTER]

-{ Quote: "How is the current state of this beta?" }-

I don't read any beneficial expected progress in user's requests, does anyone else?

http://www.pctools.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=59

[RejZoR]

Finally a 64bit version. It took them like a year for this. I just hope this beta won't last for another year...

[risl]

It is very annoying that if I make a rule to ask if some program is allowed to make an internet connection, only options I have is to kill/quarantine the process or allow it. I can't let the program run and just block the internet access. Hopefully the "smarter" alerts will fix this.

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "It is very annoying that if I make a rule to ask if some program is allowed to make an internet connection, only options I have is to kill/quarantine the process or allow it. I can't let the program run and just block the internet access. Hopefully the "smarter" alerts will fix this." }-

I hadn't hear about a plan for "smarter" alerts. Can you say more about that?

[Eice]

-{ Quote: "It is very annoying that if I make a rule to ask if some program is allowed to make an internet connection, only options I have is to kill/quarantine the process or allow it. I can't let the program run and just block the internet access. Hopefully the "smarter" alerts will fix this." }-
Are you running Vista, by any chance?

[rdsu]

The support doesn't seem to be nothing special...

Is there some free program like this one?

I don't like HIPS...

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "I don't read any beneficial expected progress in user's requests, does anyone else?

http://www.pctools.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=59" }-

most of the info and feedback on the beta is in the BETA forum, not in threatfire forum, u need to ask for access to it.

[risl]

No, I don't run Vista and ..

Threatfire's new beta now supports 64-bit!

Key new features:

* Smarter Alerts, Less Questions – patent-pending technology
* Support for Windows Vista 64-bit
* Updated threat detection technology

This was mentioned in the first post: "smarter alerts"

[RejZoR]

Has anyone tested how hard does ThreatFire affect battery on laptop?
I'd install it on my laptop but i'm afraid it would drain the battery too much.

[Smiggy]

Does it still insist on Quarantining 'suspect' files instead of simply giving you the option to deny the action?
Weird given that this package once was Cyberhawk and had that very same option!!

Just wait till it decides to do it on a 'core' file, explorer.exe, for example!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

rdsu
Massive Poster Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: pt
Posts: 3,814

Re: Threatfire 4.1.0.9 BETA

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The support doesn't seem to be nothing special...

Is there some free program like this one?

I don't like HIPS...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't worry, Threatfire isn't a HIPS package, it's a Behaviour Blocker.
Completely different thing altogether.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[rdsu]

-{ Quote: "rdsu
Massive Poster Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: pt
Posts: 3,814

Re: Threatfire 4.1.0.9 BETA

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The support doesn't seem to be nothing special...

Is there some free program like this one?

I don't like HIPS...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't worry, Threatfire isn't a HIPS package, it's a Behaviour Blocker.
Completely different thing altogether.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------" }-
That is why my interest in ThreatFire, and I will wait for the final version... :)

[EASTER]

Personally i would like to see TF finally hit paydirt and release a version that not only adds the DENY option but zeroes in on the offending source file (.exe) and not carry off my system files to Quarantine like it does with REGEDIT, etc.

Djames is just not offering the answers users really are looking for, but then he is only relaying what they confine him to say in reply. Would be nice if a developer would chime in occasionally and let TF expectants know for sure what they can expect and if they will advance TF beyond where it's stalled at right now IMO. The mere fact of being able to import/export rules in TF would be another step ahead.

Still waiting myself..........................EASTER

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "Personally i would like to see TF finally hit paydirt and release a versio that not only adds the DENY option but zeroes in on the offending source file (.exe) and not carry off my system files to Quarantine like it does with REGEDIT, etc.

Still waiting myself..........................EASTER" }-

im waiting here to :( might be a LONG wait though it seems...

[GES/POR]

So, any more news on this beta?

[rdsu]

-{ Quote: "So, any more news on this beta?" }-
It was already released...

New In Threatfire V4.1 (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=233638)

;)

[GES/POR]

-{ Quote: "It was already released...

New In Threatfire V4.1 (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=233638)

;)" }-

But it doesnt support vista 64 bit

[firzen771]

the real beta hasnt been released, they still have a beta going, and once its released THEN it will support x64

[Saraceno]

I know people are waiting for ThreatFire to have a deny option.

I'm wondering though, as no-one complains about paying for Mamutu, if ThreatFire start charging say $15 a year for their product, will people pay for it?

Or would the paid version need 'extra' features to justify the outlay of $$?

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "I know people are waiting for ThreatFire to have a deny option.

I'm wondering though, as no-one complains about paying for Mamutu, if ThreatFire start charging say $15 a year for their product, will people pay for it?

Or would the paid version need 'extra' features to justify the outlay of $$?" }-

They wouldn't need to start charging $15 a year for their product. All they need to do, is to kill their free version, which compared to paid one, needs to have community feedback on, so that it updates automatically.
That's the only difference.

But, I also wonder if people would be paying a product that, according to some people complaining, kills their keyboard and touchpad.

Mamutu, on the other hand, is a worth paying tool. I already tested it, and plan on using it soon.

I guess that, if, PCTools, kills their free version, most people will, either not use any alike tool, unless they find one other freebie, or will go to Mamutu.

Perhaps, the reason why they haven't done it so already?

I mean, what's the purpose of having both free and paid, if the difference is just the one I mentioned above?

Makes me wonder...

[Saraceno]

True, but I've also used Mamutu, and believe any of these behaviour monitoring programs are not fully 'novice-proof'.

While using Mamutu, I noticed it popped up a couple of times a suspicious action and to quarantine 'explorer.exe'. Once it contacted the community database after the timed limit (30 seconds or so), this message went away. But if I was a new user, panicked, and selected 'quarantine', could have caused a big problem.

Depends on the user, and what programs they have installed. I know a lot of people where ThreatFire has never thrown up a single alert, ever. Same with Mamutu.

Overall, it's default setting provides solid protection. Yes it can get better and improve.

But just like I see the value in people paying for the premium version, say Avira, for example, I do think TF is worth $$. Plenty, and I mean plenty, of worse programs out there charging people. Also, all programs (AVs, anti-spyware, firewalls etc) have reported user problems. :)

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "True, but I've also used Mamutu, and believe any of these behaviour monitoring programs are not fully 'novice-proof'.

While using Mamutu, I noticed it popped up a couple of times a suspicious action and to quarantine 'explorer.exe'. Once it contacted the community database after the timed limit (30 seconds or so), this message went away. But if I was a new user, panicked, and selected 'quarantine', could have caused a big problem.

Depends on the user, and what programs they have installed. I know a lot of people where ThreatFire has never thrown up a single alert, ever. Same with Mamutu.
" }-

Yes, I agree. It depends on the user. But, I guess that it is a matter of who sets up the system, sets it up to be secure, but not that much intrusive.

I don't think that a "novice" would, by him/herself install such applications. But, I guess that's why they both have different levels of experience. But, again, such setups would need to be done by someone who knows how to tweak them for fewer alerts possible, without sacrificing protection, by applying other security measures.

-{ Quote: "
Overall, it's default setting provides solid protection. Yes it can get better and improve.

But just like I see the value in people paying for the premium version, say Avira, for example, I do think TF is worth $$. Plenty, and I mean plenty, of worse programs out there charging people. Also, all programs (AVs, anti-spyware, firewalls etc) have reported user problems. :)" }-

Yes, indeed. There's no single application without it's glitches. But, at this precise moment, and let's forget the alerts, if someone asks you which would be a better paying asset, which one, between Mamutu and ThreatFire, would you advice, considering the complainings done towards one and the other?

I'd advice Mamutu. And, at a first glance not due to more or fewer alerts, more or less protection (they both are great), rather because of the complainings towards ThreatFire about blocking keyboard and touchpad.

Even I don't dare to install ThreatFire. :D Except in virtual machines, that is. ;)
So, I would never advice it, as a preference of my own. I would advice people to be careful if wanting to use it, though, based on what I see other people saying about those two products.

Regards

[Saraceno]

All cool MB.

I do favour Mamutu, but mainly because its currently lighter than ThreatFire.

Seeing all sorts of user tests on Wilders, I'd have to same their protection is very similar, maybe on default settings compared to Mamutu (without paranoid settings), I'd say TF on Wilders with just the user tests posted, TF might be slightly, and very slightly, ahead.

A friend of mine is a total novice, so I installed Avira free and ThreatFire about a year ago. I went around his place recently, and noticed a ton of applications installed. All legitimate - user intended to install these. Online poker applications, Counter-Strike and similar games, the list goes on. Asked him if he's seen any alerts, he said, 'only last week'. I checked, and Avira had picked up a couple of minor threats.

Scanned with several well-known on-demand programs, scanned for rootkits, spyware, checked all his start-up applications, went through every process with a-squared's hijackfree, analysed these processes through regular google searches, and his system was A+. What's even better, no user interaction was needed, no confusing alerts during his whole time playing online games, downloading all sorts of programs, with these two programs running.

I guess what I'm getting at, sometimes it can be the other programs we have running. And as shown in recent 'new user' posts, some users have several behaviour and malware programs running at once. So when a touchpad or keypad goes down, and the whole system is screwed, I question, was it ThreatFire, or ThreatFire quarantining a system process that is being 'hooked/injected/monitored by' (whatever the term is) by another 'anti-malware' application, therefore making the system process appear 'suspicious'.

Maybe it's more a compatibility issue. That is, either TF needs to make their product more compatible, or the other program needs to make their program more compatible with TF.

But with say a few applications running, TF + (simple) AV, I haven't seen a problem.

[Firebytes]

I used Cyberhawk and then Threatfire for awhile after the name change without problems. I even recommended it to several people as a good security enhancement that was easy to use. In later builds though I had trouble with TF interfering with some applications running or certain functions of those applications with no alerts from TF whatsoever. My father even began having problems getting some links on a website (CNN I believe) to open whenever TF was running. When it was suspended they would open fine. After the annoying blocks without prompts and especially the prospect of possibly having a major system component quarantined or having my keyboard killed we stopped using TF. A shame too because before those issues the only complaint I had with it was the lack of a "Deny" option in the program.

[jmonge]

it may be off topic but i think that D.S.A will be a good free replacement for T.F;D it has the allow/denny option we all want to see in T.F:)

[Kees1958]

Jmonge,

DSA was an amazing application at the time. Why do you use AppGuard and DefenseWall. DW has more to offer?

Cheesr

[jmonge]

-{ Quote: "Jmonge,

DSA was an amazing application at the time. Why do you use AppGuard and DefenseWall. DW has more to offer?

Cheesr" }-i will be testing appguard to see how it works

[Julian]

Can someone plz give me a direct download link for the beta with Vista x64 support? I can't register at that crappy pc tools forum, I get not activation mail.

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "Can someone plz give me a direct download link for the beta with Vista x64 support? I can't register at that crappy pc tools forum, I get not activation mail." }-

Try this:

http://www.threatfire.com/files/tfbeta64.exe

[Julian]

-{ Quote: "Try this:

http://www.threatfire.com/files/tfbeta64.exe" }-
Thanks :)

I just uninstalled it: No self defence no need...

[EASTER]

What in the sam hill is Symantec PCTools doing?.......dragging their feet so much on a product that could not only be marketable but profitable if only they would not offer hearing service only but enact many of the great recommendations voiced by their users time and time again.

TF was nearly (Like CyberHawk) on the verge of fashioning a most unique approach short of a full blown HIPS only to seem content to simply sit on it AS-IS IN IT'S present form.

This still reminds me of the proverbial Hot Potatoe. If whatever, finances, lack of sales and so on stay this path, then TF is destined to end up another in a string of what once were good apps taking it on the chin. But hey it's their greenback to waste OR conserve for other more pressing problems i suppose.