Is Prevx good?

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by truthseeker, Aug 31, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ChrisP

    ChrisP Suspended Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Posts:
    447
    Location:
    UK
    @EraserHW - how can I configure Prevx to block the Zemana logger tests - see the Zemana thread where a user claims that Prevx blocks all the tests.

    i have purchased a license for Prevx2, but it wont block any of the tests.

    Cheers,

    Chris
     
  2. truthseeker

    truthseeker Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Posts:
    977
    As far as I know, yet I could be wrong, I am more wrong than I am right, but you can't. It wont block it.
     
  3. ChrisP

    ChrisP Suspended Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Posts:
    447
    Location:
    UK
    Great! Why do people lie about it then?

    I now have a green blob sitting in my system tray and £15 less in my bank account!
     
  4. bellgamin

    bellgamin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    8,102
    Location:
    Hawaii
    More often than not, people who say such things are not intentionally lying. Usually, they simply do not know how to do tests that require a pseudo-infection. To do a keylogger test, you must ALLOW the keylogger test to be installed (the pseudo-infection) and then ALLOW it to TRY to execute.

    After the user has ALLOWED his computer to be pseudo-infected, a security application will be considered to have "Passed the test" if it blocks the keylogger from executing OR if it blocks the keylogger from connecting out.

    Thus, some folks will think a security app has passed because it disallowed the keylogger to install, or flagged it as "suspicious." Most HIPS & most community-based apps (e.g. Prevx, Threatfire, DriveSentry) will record ALL new stuff as "suspicious." Thus, many users of such apps will consider that they have "passed" a test, whereas they never allowed the test to be executed in the first place.

    Therefore, in order to test a keylogger, your other security must FAIL to alert you that the dropper/keylogger is trying to install, &/or you must FAIL to take proper action when receiving such an alert.

    Since ANYONE can be careless, at times, and NO security app is perfect, the best (NOT perfect) keylogger protection (IMO) is a firewall + Sandboxie -- both configured to block ALL out-connections except those pre-specified by user.

    Prevx is an okay security app. As things stand right now I wouldn't buy it myself, but if I did have it already, I might use it as an added layer of security.
     
  5. ChrisP

    ChrisP Suspended Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Posts:
    447
    Location:
    UK
    Hi, I understand what you are saying, however, I dont see how anyone could claim that Prevx could have blocked ANY of the tests let alone all of them since it does not even alert to them being run! - It is not a case that the user has blocked their exicution and then in ignorance believed this has "detected" the logging activity - since it displays no alert when they are run.

    Im trying to be objective and even handed here - there was nothing for the user to misinterprate. You install Prevx, you run the Zemana tests, they all work (intercept keystrokes / screen caps etc) with no warning or anything from Prevx. Unfortunately, its called lying. God knows why people do it.
     
  6. emperordarius

    emperordarius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Who cares
    I think that the user was being ironic. Read the post carefully:

     
  7. bellgamin

    bellgamin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    8,102
    Location:
    Hawaii
    My condolences.:doubt:
     
  8. truthseeker

    truthseeker Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Posts:
    977
    The best (NOT perfect) keylogger protection (IMO) is running Linux for all your secure internet activities. And then you can use Windows for every other activity that would not matter what you typed into the keyboard.

    That way, your personal and private information such as accessing netbanking etc, would all be done through Linux, e.g Ubuntu or Fedora, and those platforms where you wont need any concerns for keyloggers.
     
  9. ChrisP

    ChrisP Suspended Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Posts:
    447
    Location:
    UK
    I wonder if Prevx will give me my £14 back as I no longer want this worthless piece of green dung on my PC? LOL
     
  10. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    13,744
    Location:
    Canada
    chrisp ,are you chris pirillo?just curious
     
  11. ChrisP

    ChrisP Suspended Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Posts:
    447
    Location:
    UK
    Eh? No, Im Chris "I have Prevcrap on my PC"
     
  12. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,102
    Location:
    North Carolina USA
    I must have made an error in what I mistook for it detecting or blocking the tests. And for that I aplogize.

    But now as for you ChrisP, it seems others have crossed you in making claims you feel are not true.

    here

    In this one you state you are not going to take whats said here, you need proof I think were your words

    And in 2004 where you claim no one here has ever provided a scrap of proof for anything they have ever said

    But if you are unhappy you can always ask for a refund from Prevx. It isnt like you dont know how


    cheers
     
  13. truthseeker

    truthseeker Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Posts:
    977
    Why apologize for something you meant to say? :p
     
  14. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    13,744
    Location:
    Canada
    chris pirillo is a security advisor,sorry i confuse you with him:D
     
  15. Saraceno

    Saraceno Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Posts:
    2,405
    No security application is going to give you 100 per cent protection.

    Then on the other hand, when an application almost gives users 100 per cent, people say 'it's too intrusive, drives me nuts'.

    Can Prevx be better? Most likely. Are they probably getting squeezed financially which has seen a delay in improvements? Most likely.

    Personally, I can't understand people who want their money back. You do your research, you read reviews, you use trials where available, you have the internet at your disposal. If it doesn't perform to how you'd like, then you've made a poor decision. Live with it. End of story.

    I've bought crud products. I uninstall them and learn my lesson I should choose more wisely and think twice or three times before handing my credit card details over.
     
  16. truthseeker

    truthseeker Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Posts:
    977
    I respectfully disagree.

    There are times where a refund is warranted for many reasons, e.g the software does not do what the buyer had thought it should do, or it contains bugs that stop it operating how it's supposed to etc. There are many reasons why a buyer should ask for and will be entitled for a refund.
     
  17. ChrisP

    ChrisP Suspended Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Posts:
    447
    Location:
    UK
    As for you trjam, I suggest you refrain from posting information about any tests you perform since you clearly dont understand how to perform them and you will only misslead people with your inacurate and invalid results.

    Yes, on the issue you raise, I was wrong - but it is a bit different to what you have done by saying Prevx passed all the Zemana tests - giving a wholy incorect and false statement like that must either be due to complete incompetence or a lie.
     
  18. ChrisP

    ChrisP Suspended Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Posts:
    447
    Location:
    UK
    If anyone is interested, Prevx state in their terms and conditions that you are entitled to a refund within the first seven days of activating the license. They give a dedicated refund email address for refunds. See attached image for the results of sending an email to this address...

    What a sham.
     

    Attached Files:

  19. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    Hmmm, ugh. o_O :blink: :thumbd:
     
  20. truthseeker

    truthseeker Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Posts:
    977
    True true. But we can manage security the best we can.
     
  21. Long View

    Long View Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Posts:
    2,295
    Location:
    Cromwell Country
    agreed - provided it is understood and accepted that software is not the only way and not necessarily the best way to managed security.

    (1) I have been using 5 different security products for the last 78 years
    (2) I have never been infected
    (3) conclusion the 5 different products protected me. (wrong)

    For me Prevx and especially Prevx CSI ( and other similar programs) are of value because they allow me to check that I have not been infected. They are for checking purposes rather than for providing security itself.
     
  22. EraserHW

    EraserHW Malware Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Posts:
    588
    Location:
    Italy
    Though you're still able to send a support ticket to ask if there are problems with the e-mail address assigned to refund requests and how to do then to ask a refund. But I don't see any notice from you about this problem when readin our support ticket system, if I'm not wrong. Am I right? ;)

    I sincerely don't understand what do you want to prove with these posts. What are their goal? To show what? That maybe there have been temporary problems with mail server, or connection, or whatever else?

    Anyway, I'll forward this notice of malfunction to our sysadmin to ask if there are any issue and I'll report here when everything is working again.

    Still, I don't understand what's the meaning and the goal of some posts done by some users.

    To everyone that posted here and haven't received any reply by me: I apologize, I've been out the whole day yesterday, so I'll reply as soon as possible.

    Kind regards,

    Marco
     
  23. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    Yeah, that's a wonderful solution... Presumably he'd get a reply a couple months after the refund deadline expired? :p Seriously, it's not exactly users business to make sure your mailserver is working.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2008
  24. EraserHW

    EraserHW Malware Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Posts:
    588
    Location:
    Italy
    Do you have any evidence we do that for refund? :)

    Seriously, if there has been any issue that we're not aware of, the best thing you can do is to report it.

    And - this is a personal opinion - I disagree with this kind of behavior of writing ignominious words without hasn't checked before. As a user, when I've found something not working, I've always reported it to the main company. It's always possible something is not working and the company is yet not aware of it. Then, only AFTER I haven't received any reply or any useful reply, I can write what are my thoughts about *that* company's behavior.
     
  25. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    Your MX servers totally rock... you haven't noticed yet no mail whatsoever can get through? :rolleyes: :thumbd:

    Code:
    220 mx1.emailsrvr.com ESMTP - (gate28.gate.iad.mlsrvr.com) VA Code Section 18.2-152.3:1 forbids sending spam through this system
    ehlo mx.[I]********.**[/I]
    250-gate28.gate.iad.mlsrvr.com
    250-PIPELINING
    250-SIZE 75000000
    250-ETRN
    250-STARTTLS
    250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
    250 8BITMIME
    mail from: postmaster@[I]********.**[/I]
    [B]501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax[/B]
    quit
    221 2.0.0 Bye
    
    220 mx2.emailsrvr.com ESMTP - (gate23.gate.sat.mlsrvr.com) VA Code Section 18.2-152.3:1 forbids sending spam through this system
    ehlo mx.[I]********.**[/I]
    250-gate23.gate.sat.mlsrvr.com
    250-PIPELINING
    250-SIZE 75000000
    250-ETRN
    250-STARTTLS
    250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
    250 8BITMIME
    mail from: postmaster@[I]********.**[/I]
    [B]501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax[/B]
    quit
    221 2.0.0 Bye
    
    (And yeah, before you ask, ********.** was a real domain, censored for posting here. :p)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.