Anyone using Geswall ever get infected / hacked etc

Just wondering what others have experienced. When asking this question,I realize there's gonna be some people who say,yes,you can be infected /hacked if you select "lable as trusted" on a file /application thats not safe. This I understand. I'm mainly refering to just general browsing,emailing etc.

Thanks!

 

Not ever hacked or infected. I've used GW for a about a year or so and it has saved my butt a few times against rogue AV's. As far as being hacked goes...no...then again it would be pointless to hack most individuals when corporations/businesses have data that is actually of some value. GW has spanked any malware I have ever came across in the wild.

 

the thread is pointless in my opinion. User might not be infected with out any security software and they might get infected even if they have a pile of security applications. Hope you understand.
Other wise geswall is rock solid against any malware. Too bad that it seems to be almost a dead product.

 

NOT dead! See HERE. Policy-based HIPS do not require frequent updates but that doesn't mean they are dying. Good grief!!!

The latest GW update (ver. 2.9) was issued just 6 months ago with the following changes...

+GW now works on Win7
+Application Wizard runs with UAC enabled on WinVista & Win7
+GW now supports IE8, Live Messenger, & Live mail
+Several fixes of minor bugs
+Next major update is GW 3.0 to support 64-bit Vista & Win7

Since GW is up to date with the latest Windows version, plus IE8, plus 64-bit in the works, etc., WHAT exactly is there about GW 2.9 that renders it "almost a dead product"? That sort of unwarranted comment can be the kiss of death for a niche security software. GW is very much contemporary, & remains quite a powerful security program.

 

I agree with Aigle,

Initially we had DefenseWall on my wife's PC, GeSWall on my Son's (since they used add requested aps real soon). Since moving to Vista x64, I have used it some time (on XP Pro, now only using OS-security). I hope they make the transition to x64 soon.

Agree with Bellgamin though, since the application wizzard there is no need to request new aps. I like the fact the GW uses OS internals (it is also a limitation, but when you know how to deal with it, it really is not a limitation).

 

Geswall is far from being "dead" the way it looks to me.

 

I don't use Geswall but you may be interested in this vid, this kid tests out some malicous websites with Geswall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeRJg8_seVg

Seems like a very solid layer of protection.

If I understand it correctly, it is a virtulization software similar to sandboxie that runs apps in a closed environment?

 

I really want it to survive and become more polished.

 

i think its more like defensewall than sandboxie, but i culd be wrong since i dont use GesWall.

 

when i tested geswall i tried to get infected but i couldn`t.tried it with a couple of rootkits, some trojans and lots and lots of adware/spyware...no result...so in my opinion geswall is a very good security tool. and to be honest i tested the free version not the pro one.. geswall

 

cool tipo

 

Thanks! This is what I was looking for

 

When he cleared the junk in the test he got rid of all his settings,he clearly did not know that from his comments at the end of the video,thats the only downside i find of Geswall

 

I have a question... if I use Geswall, do I still need Sandboxie?

 

Yes,I've tested alot of malware and haven't found anything that will cause any harm.

 

Check HERE.

 

Before putting out a 64-bit edition I would like them to push out a version where UAC and GeSWall are compatible with each other on Vista and Win 7.

For example you cannot mark files trusted/untrusted via right click menu without disabling UAC.

IME, GW performs flawlessly on XP but not as well on Vista/Win 7.

 

I've used GeSWall on a WinXP Home and Pro pc and on a Vista Home pc without using UAC. I have to say it is one of the best security softwares I have ever tried protecting browser sessions. Not sure about running other apps through it but protecting FF and IE it is top notch. This is using the free version also.


Ice

 

On Opera too, I'm using it from a long time, very high protection.

 

I am considering to remove Sandboxie and using GesWall instead. That way I get rid of the Sandboxie 5 sec nag screen too

It's good to know that I can visit any website, even ones that would contain the worse malware and nasty scripts, and Geswall would protect my system from getting infected.

So if my understanding is correct, no matter what happens in a Geswall IE session, nothing will "jump out" and affect and infect the rest of my system?

So Geswall is just another Sandboxie, but it seems it's better.

 

Both are very poor assumptions. Sandboxie has a much higher user base, is regularly tested against malware and is under continual development. Geswall, whilst not dead, is a bit like an old person asleep in their chair breathing quietly....you need to prod them hard just to be sure.

IMO, from a security perspective, the only thing that Geswall has going for it is that it is free. If you want a heavily proven security solution then choose Sandboxie, pay the one time licence fee and gain benefit from all the additional functionality.

 

Scoobs, if I have made some poor assumptions as you say I have, then please help me better understand.

If there is a flaw in Geswall, can you please post it here so I can read about it and realise what it is.

You say if I want , "heavily proven security solution", then choose Sandboxie over GesWall. So what makes GesWall not fall into the category of "heavily proven security solution"? What is the weakness of Geswall over Sandboxie? What cannot Geswall do that Sandboxie does?

Can I visit a particular website where Geswall will fail? If that is the case, can you give me an example and evidence of that?

Because according to this guy, who apparently test many apps, say it passed all his tests:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeRJg8_seVg

Thanks for your answers as they will help me better understand.

 

one thing i can add to this converstion is that sandboxie development is more complex than geswall and it is very slowly development

 

I see it in a simple way. When you're unable to test Geswall and Sandboxie against the xx million pieces of malware out there, the best thing you can do is look at how big the user base is and how many of those users throw malware against the application to test it. Sandboxie is very well tested, Geswall generally isn't, simply due to its user base size. So which application is proven more in the real world? Clearly Sandboxie. I'm not saying Geswall has weaknesses, all I'm saying is that if it has it is much much less likely to have them exposed and fixed compared to Sandboxie.

 

geswall can also protect the system as or same way as sandboxie but sandboxie is more popular and geswall some times give to many issues