SSM is free. How long? PG reg dil...

[degarb]

On fence with registering processguard.

But not needed until maxcomputing's ssm is out of beta.

But, I would reg Process Guard today and get it over, if I knew ssm had plans to charge. SO, anyone know ssm/ maxcomputing plans for sw fees.

How good is pg support?


PS. I cannot get prevx to install now. I really like how prevx could guard against exe modifications, which is a virus prevention nobrainer, which seems missing in ssm and processguard.

[Paranoid2000]

The latest version of SSM (1.9.6 beta 2) will remain free until May 2005. Even if a shareware version is released, a free (albeit restricted) version will still be offered. However the author has been considering a shareware version for over a year so I would not consider May 2005 a definite cutoff time (though you can ask at the SSM Forum (http://mc.webm.ru/bb/forum.php) for more details).

Both SSM and PG will notify you of .exe modifications (if that file was allowed to run previously) and SSM gives a option to scan the file if you have configured an AV scanner in Preferences/Options/Misc, a nice convenience feature.

Also note that you can run both - PG provides better termination protection while SSM has better application control (and the option of registry/system file monitoring).

[AJohn]

Don't forget to check out tinyfirewall ... you can choose not to install everything but the Windows Security features :D

[Just wondering]

Here is a handy free app .....EZ to use and set-up

Nice to have for a second opinion....I added the icon to desktop for easy
access


http://www.beyondlogic.org/solutions/trust-no-exe/trust-no-exe.htm

[hollywoodpc]

If you like PG , register it . The support is very good . Regardless of SSM going shareware or not . PG is very good at what it does . More stable than SSM but , as P2K mentioned , they somewhat differ from each other in what they can do . Good luck in your quest

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "Here is a handy free app .....EZ to use and set-up" }-Had a quick look at Trust-no-exe and would note the following: It does not maintain checksums/fingerprints of files, so if a trusted file is altered (e.g. by a virus or other malware), it will not provide any warning; It allows folders to be specified - while this may make it convenient, using this facility makes it rather insecure since any new file added to such a folder would be trusted also. Setting strict NTFS permissions on such folders can mitigate this (specifically setting Create Files/Folders to deny) but this then requires more work; Trust/Deny entries are held in the Windows Registry, so could easily be altered by malware.In summary, this can provide some protection against simple email attachment viruses but would not be sufficient to counter active viruses (i.e. ones that have already infected trusted files) or sophisticated malware.

[kareldjag]

Hi,

I've already done this link twice, like here:

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=338566

Trust-no-exe is just a basic executable filter and it does not increase security as strongly as PG does.
With a black and white list apllications, it is interesting if you want to deny access on an application or folder or CDROM/flopy disk when an other person (childs, friends...) uses our PC.

Some of the best Free softs that we could add to PG for a better security are:

*SSM
*AbtrusionProtector.

Regards