SafeSpace.. your thoughts

I can't recall the poster, but someone on here turned me on to Artificial Dynamics SafeSpace sandbox program. I've been running it for several weeks and I'm happy with it.

I have one concern.. why is SafeSpace never mentioned in the same subject line or topic with Sandboxie, DW, GESwall etc... Is SafeSpace in the same class as the aforementioned or is it just not good enough to be mentioned?

 

I've used SafeSpace, SandboxIE & GESwall - I liked SafeSpace (SS) the best. One reason it doesn't get a lot of play here is some people don't like that SS needs Microsoft .NET, but this is a non-issue for me. SS did impact performance on my system a little, but if it's working well for you then don't worry. It's good software.

 

Rest asure,

It is good program with a smart architecture (cross over of application virtualisation like SBIE and Policy sandbox like GeSWall). I would choose it over SBIE (nag screen and GUI)

 

I, too, have switched from SBIE to SafeSpace. I don't really found that it slowed my computers, even on an somewhat oldish Athlon 1600.

 

SafeSpace certainly seems to be in the same class (from reading several posts here at Wilders). There has been one post here at Wilders where SafeSpace was tested against some nasties and did extremely well, yet few seemed to even notice. I guess many users are happy with SBIE, DW and Geswall and see no need to change. And as Kees1958 says - no nag screens, no registration, no trial and totally FREE.

Me too. Been using it for a few months now and far prefer it to SBIE - I find it easier to configure, easier to use and the display easier to read.

Doesn't slow my machine, either, any more than SBIE did last time I tried the last version. Some have said that it slows their startup, but not for me.

I also find it strange that SafeSpace doesn't seem to get deserved recognition, perhaps purely for the fact that it may be a little more resource hungry than SBIE. Still, if users are happy with SBIE then that's fine. I used to be a user of SBIE myself until I discovered SafeSpace. It'll take a lot for me to change from SafeSpace now, I must admit.

 

SS is the best (Security)- Programm that I have ever used, all the other Programms are for testing or playing and if you uninstall all the other "useless" things, nothing will be slow down anymore.

 

Oh dear! Another one who thinks they've found the 'silver bullet'.

muf

 

@ muf

No, the absolute truth is to use nothing, because no Software can protect you, but SS give me the best feeling at surfing and keep my Harddrive clean.

 

Do you not think that for some SafeSpace alone might be adequate ? If so what minimum requirements would suffice ?

 

I would imagine that all of these programs have some overhead ? On an old machine I certainly found that the first time I went on to the net with firefox and sandboxie that it took a number of extra seconds.

The OP is surprised by the lack of coverage for SafeSpace. I'm even more intrigued by the lack of coverage for GesWall - by far the best of this type that I have tried. Strange how some programs get adopted and others tend to get ignored.

 

You are right, but you are also wrong. When you say "no software can protect you". You would be right saying that no software is guaranteed to protect you. But software can protect you. Using one application to protect you is risky. If you have an image backup of your system then you have that to fall back to in the event of the 'unthinkable'. But why risk it all using one application? I've never seen a single application that can do it all, and guarantee protection. So most users have a second line of defense in case their main one gets compromised. Of course, some have a third line, a fourth line, fifth line... But I can't imagine using only one. For me the risk would be too great.

muf

 

Muf, if your System is on the latest Patch-Level and if you have hardened it there is not much that can happen if your brain stands beside you.

My second line are OnDemand scans of new files and the third line is sitting behind the machine.

The only thing you can try to do is to fix unclosed Security holes and that is what SS is make for.

If you run a dozen of Security apps, your security holes are bigger than before, because the Software is fighting with themself and not with the Malware.

 

You seem pretty clued up so I suspect you've got your bases covered. Just hope SS never fails.

It appears that way for Matern. As to minimum requirements. I don't believe such a thing exists. I certainly wouldn't feel secure using one application but then that's me. If others feel one application is enough then good luck to them and I sincerely hope it works. I'd love to be able to run one application, hell none would be better! But layered still feels safer. Obviously, in moderation. I don't for one second believe running a gazillion application's simultaneously is healthy and as Matern has pointed out, can actually make you less safe. But I do advocate the use of a 'Plan B'.

Matern, I hope it works for you. If it proves to be the 'silver bullet' then I'm well happy for you.

muf

 

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=199167&highlight=safespace impressions

These are my thoughts.

 

Ah, aigle, it was you

 

I agree - it is a personal thing - each has different minimum requirements
which is why I always ask how often someone gets contaminated ? do they know how it happened and so on. If someone is constantly being successfully attached then clearly action needs to be taken but I would still argue that for many something like SafeSpace (and a good imaging program) is more than enough. I would certainly not feel secure without a clean system image.

 

I will tell you what I don´t like:

1 Main GUI takes like 10 to 15 seconds to load.
2 You can´t install apps into sandbox.
3 You have to first mark apps as "protected".

What I´m trying to say is that, yes it seems to be quite powerful, but it annoys the hell out of me! When it comes to usability, SBIE is a lot better IMO.

 

Use ur VM, not SafeSpace for this.

U don,t mind while clicking n clikcing on two classical HIPS prompts in real time on ur system but it gives u pain to just add an application once only in SafeSpace application list. Very strage n odd!

 

Hi Rasheed.

Thank you for your feedback.

A fair point, but the GUI is only required for configuration, not for usage. We provide a systray for quick access to commonly used features.

In the context of what SafeSpace is for, I don't feel this is an important feature. Could you expand on why you feel this is necessary when browsing the web?

How does Sandboxie work differently?

Best regards,

Kris.

Artificial Dynamics.

 

to me, they are not as closely related as some think. As far as protection I think SafeSpace is better at this and provides more blanket coverage across other apps. I agree, the gui loading is not important. SafeSpace is a great product and as I have said before, if I could only choose one security app, SS would fit the bill.

 

This is very important to me, all GUI´s should be accessible as quickly as possible. Compare it with SBIE (for example), it will show up in less than a second! Seriously, this is reason enough why I wouldn´t use SS. This is also the reason why I haven´t touched Firefox in months (slow startup time).

You can select "run sandboxed", and the app will run isolated. If you want to make sure that a certain executable always run isolated, you can put it inside the virtualization folder.

Actually, this is the main reason why I´m using SBIE, it´s not only a HIPS, it´s also a nice virtualization tool. This way, you can safely install apps and check them out without the risk of screwing up your system. Of course not all apps will work correctly, but real extensive testing is done inside VM anyway.

Well, that´s a different thing, these alerts are here to warn me, it´s not about usability. And I have configured my HIPS in a way that I won´t get to see 2 alerts, most of the time. Of course I agree that classical HIPS can (and must) be improved a lot, to make them less noisy.

 

So which features are missing from the Systray (which opens in less than a second)?

So no real difference then

 

Why u insist to use SafeSpace for something for which it is not made?

U can take the clicks needed in SafeSpace also a way to warn u n remind you about what u are going to run inside SafeSpace.

It,s to be done just once after install and that,s all. I don,t know why u complain too much for such a minor thing. U have to do same with SBIE even.

 

I have to admit, I must have missed this feature, but I will tell you one thing, I hate to access/configure stuff via some trayicon. Just give me the GUI, and make it fast!

I´m just giving ideas, it´s up to the developers what to do with it.

Wrong. Let´s give an example: I want to run Rootkit X inside SBIE---> right click---> select "run sandboxed". It will immediately run sandboxed. Now I want to run Rootkit X inside SS----> right click---> select "Protect with SS", and then I will have to double click it. It´s a small thing, but annoying to me.

 

SafeSpace has a 'Run in SafeSpace' option on the context menu of executables.