Emsisoft Anti-Malware 8.xx Sammelthread

Quick question...

I know that on Online Armor if you use beta updates and deselect the option, the program downloads and reverts to the last stable release.

Is it the same for EAM?

I'd like to try out the current EAM beta and then deselect the option without reverting to the last stable release if possible.

Will this work? (I haven't used EAM's beta downloads in a few years.)

Thanks.

 

Fabian,
are you going to apply for AV-Test.org?

 

Someone asked the same question earlier but I can't find it now I believe the answer was something like Emsisoft had spent all their marketing money on AVC.

 

The CEO has the answer : https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=2261253&postcount=78

 

Just as a small demonstration of how effective the new update mechanism is, a few numbers of my last update:

This is the last update downloaded with the current stable version:

Code:

7 modules, 8045335 bytes

Signatures\BD\variant.c01 (6776709 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\update.txt (347 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\e_spyw.i14 (201068 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\e_spyw.i09 (255066 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\emalware.048 (145644 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\dalvik.cvd (199384 bytes) - updated
a2hosts.dat (467117 bytes) - updated

Now, this update includes the dreaded variant.c01 file, that I mentioned before, that's quite large (~ 6.7 MB). But even without it there are almost 1.3 MB of updates that were downloaded in the old, purely incremental model.

So let's take a look at the very same update done with the new beta version:

Code:

7 modules, 3626 bytes

Signatures\BD\variant.c01 (998 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\update.txt (347 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\e_spyw.i14 (412 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\e_spyw.i09 (417 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\emalware.048 (672 bytes) - updated
Signatures\BD\dalvik.cvd (341 bytes) - updated
a2hosts.dat (439 bytes) - updated

In this particular case, the new hybrid updates feature saved us around 99.95% of the traffic. Depending on what files are updated and how old your files are, this percentage may vary. The more regular you update, the better it gets. On average, the savings are around 90% across all files (both signatures and binaries). The most regular updated files are signature files however, where the savings are considerably higher as you can see based on this small example .

It is. It will revert back to stable if you disable that option.

 

Thanks, Fabian. I found that out later last night after some experimenting.

FWIW, I didn't find that installing the beta either improved or removed the system slowdown which appeared to derive primarily from services.exe frequently using large amounts of CPU on my XP Pro SP3 system (2 Gb of RAM).

I've (for the time being) removed EAM while I see how my system operates using an alternative approach along with OA and Sandboxie. Thus far the services.exe issue is not present and the system is much snappier. (I wish I had better news as the EAM/OA/Sandboxie combo remains my favorite.)

This all began after the most recent stable release of EAM was installed.

 

Emsisoft... Have they already removed that "feature", which allowed any malware renamed to outlook.exe pass their protection?

Also, a company that has written "click to embiggen" on their official page, can't be serious...

 

I had to go through some ancient trac backups to find what that was about. Anyways, yeah it has been removed.

Feel free to provide links and I will forward them to the web developers. At least Google doesn't find anything when doing a search for "embiggen site:emsisoft.com".

 

Fabian I have a question regarding the updates: With the new streamlined updates does the user still receive all the daily BD updates? I only ask because when I was using BD my first daily update was usually around 16 mb with a further 3 updates each day at around 10 mb each.

 

Yes. You still get exactly the same updates that Bitdefender users get at exactly the same frequency. They are just a lot smaller now .

 

Ok thanks Fabian.

 

Definitely looks impressive. Eagerly awaitng for the next production release of EAM.

 

I still find the same old GUI rather unresponsive. Have Emsisoft ever considered changing it? I like that it's quite clean but it does feel like a design for Windows XP.

I am a big fan of the protection and I use a license for one of my computers... but the GUI is getting more and more annoying after several years.

 

Where is the whistling smiley when you need one?

 

Have this on me

 

Thanks!

@shadek:

 

it looks good but it will be nicer if we get a 1 complete package with 1 installer for the internet security

 

I really like Emsisoft Anti-Malware, but it really doesnt play nice with my machine, maybe with this new beta update things will become better ...

 

May I ask what problems you are having?

 

I feel some serious slowdown when File Guard is active ...


Here is the topic that I made sometime ago:


http://support.emsisoft.com/topic/9620-eam-7-advanced-cache-is-working-for-file-guard/


Thanks

 

In that case, EAM 8.1 should be a major improvement. Please let me know how things go.

 

Hi

Emsisoft gets a greatly expanded PUPs recognition

See Fabian Wosars Post Nr. 32 it is in German

http://support.emsisoft.com/topic/11648-emsisoft-anti-malware-8-wünsche/

 

And the translation is?

 

Mops21 suggested we could integrate the Ask toolbar inside EAM and submitted it as a feature request. I replied that we aren't big fans of PUPs and adding any kind of toolbar to EAM is something we won't consider. As a result one of the users, markusg, mentioned that he is happy that we aren't following the toolbar trend as it would put us into a particular nasty spot when it comes to detecting these toolbars as what they are: Unwanted pieces of junk.

I replied that we recently had a rather heated discussion about PUPs, as our malware removal staff nowadays spends more time getting rid of crap like Optimizer Pro, Browser Protect, or Price Peek, than anything else. Neither of them is illegal or even malware. But a majority of the users install these types of applications by accident. We always detected stuff that used deceiving techniques to get the user to consent to the installation (for example labeling the "Decline" button of the PUP installation confirmation page "Cancel" to suggest you have to install this crap to install the application you actually want), but we feel that is no longer enough. We therefore try to figure out right now how we can be more aggressive when it comes to PUPs, without necessarily getting sued by dozens of companies. As soon as that process is finished, we will change our PUP policies to be much more aggressive.