![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hello,
Does anyone know why new (undetected) malware is able to slip by most anti-virus real-time protection? |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
because they do & can, nothing is 100% perfect...
__________________
Larry |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Because until the AV companies get it and add signature, they can't detect it. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
In addition to using AVs, some users (myself included) also use HIPS applications, such as Mamutu (a behavior blocker) and Malware Defender (a "classical"), which can further alert users to malware which gets by their AV. However, IMO the "ultimate protection" is to periodically image your system drive.
__________________
Primo freebeez: TinyWatcher POP Peeper Kalender |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
This is why apps like Returnil and Shadow Defender, not to forget Sandboxie are superior for prevention.
__________________
Now that I'm older, I seem to have more patience. It turns out I just don't give a crap. WIN 7 64x, Avast! PRO V8, Outpost FW Pro 8.x, MBAM Pro Real Time, Shadow Defender, Macrium Reflect Standard, AX64 Time Machine
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Based on your comments, it sounds like an AV is not enough anymore by itself no matter what brand it is. I wonder why it is still the dominent method in determining if a file is rogue. For example, there are many virus upload sites like VirusTotal that use several name brand AV programs that scan the file(s) for recognition. Sometimes you'll see 2 or 3 that detect, other times more, other times zero. It seems that this is still the security model being used to find out if a file is bad.
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Maybe this will give you some insight ? http://www.eset.com/download/whitepa...c_Analysis.pdf |
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|