The end of ThreatFire...

[Noob]

Time to let it go buddy (Firecat) . . .

[Firecat]

I'm just waiting to see what they have for their 2013 versions. That will make or break the final nail in the coffin. For what it's worth their products do a decent job of protection as long as they work as expected.

[jo3blac1]

Originally Posted by NormanF

As I mentioned, BBs have been incorporated into every AV product including EAM.

Well some people don't like the BBs offered by their AVs. So now they are forced to install two or three internet security apps and get BSODs...
I really prefer to have independent BB, AM and AV. And as the saying goes, you should never keep all your eggs in the same basket.

[drhu22]

Could TF still be useful given this?
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=183020

[Mman79]

Originally Posted by drhu22

Could TF still be useful given this?
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=183020

Well, that's 5 year old advice, so I'm not too sure. I never really felt TF was anything special and mostly got "noise" from it more than anything else. Still, I hate to see choices removed from users in regards to products.

[Kees1958]

The extra rules (file/registry/network) were all hooked on kernel level so yes.

TF's behavioral analysis (all other hooks it sets) is on user level, with very little self protection. The limited self protection made it vulnarable to targeted TF arttacks. So no

In its time it was the best BB in the market. Cyberhawk was a breakthough in BB application.