The unofficial Shadow Defender Support Thread.

I found corruption of the Task Scheduler while trying previous versions (in January-February 2013). I assume this was caused by SD.

I have been using v. 1.2.0.376 for three weeks, and I haven´t found any problem. I have opened the Task Scheduler many times, both in shadow mode and out of it, and haven´t detected any corruption, nor any other problem.

I use Windows 7x64.

 

Actually, I meant Task Scheduler. Somehow got it wrong but bo elam PM'd me and I edited it already. Sorry for any confusion

 

Not sure about a specific "corruption" issue, but I too had problems with many earlier versions of SD. However, 1.2.0.376 has also been working well for me on XP.

 

Personally I have never experienced such issues but other have. It's good that the latest version seems to work well with users who experienced problems in the past.

I e-mailed Tony with Pegr's and Wendi's suggestions and received an e-mail from him yesterday:

Thanks for the suggestions

Yes, the MBR and the hidden partition can be virtualized.
I will consider to add it and the main GUI need to be recognized.

Anti-Execution and Folder Protection are useful,
and i will consider to add them in a future version.

 

Hi CyberMan,

As 'you have Tony's ear', please request that he allows for virtualization not only of the MBR, but of Track 0 in its entirety!

Thank you,
Wendi

 

Hi Wendi. I never understood why Tony likes to communicate "by proxy" like this. I wish he would post himself in the official forum, people need to address issues directly to him. Both me and Patrick have urged him to post more, but I think that it's not in him.

Regarding your suggestion, yes I said to Tony that all the sectors of track0 should be virtualized. No option for that should be added, MBR and track0 should be virtualized by default, as a full part of a Shadow Mode session. He says that it can be done. Pegr's ideas too (anti-execution and folder protection).

Here's my latest mock-up of what it may look like. On this screenshot The Shadow's "Drop Rights" options are enabled by default along with the application hooks option. Anti-execution and ALLSector should be unticked by default. I see anti-execution as an on or off sort of option that would allow or block new executables that are indroduced into the virtual system while in Shadow Mode. This option has to remain simple. Off for the ones who test programs in Shadow Mode, on for the rest for better security.

 

I certainly don't understand Tony's reluctance to actively participate on the very forum that he references on his SD website!

Btw, speaking of the official SD forum, you might post your updates (from your posts above) in the appropriate threads over there.

 

Hi

Perhaps tony feels that he would be overwhelmed by criticism of his "absences", certainly in the Wildersforum where there has been abundant angst at his past behaviour.

Terry

 

Hi guys,
for a PC with Windows-7 pro, 64bit is recommended to use the latest SD version (1.2.0.376) or the old version
of "original" Tony, that's the 1.1.0.325??.....Which works better?

However, the old version (1.1.0.325) released at the beginning of 2010 ...it's enough safe and reliable on Win7-64bit?

Thank.

 

Zapco, I am using .376 in a W7 32 bits computer without any issues. I recommend you get that version. I had a minor issue in another W7 computer using .376 but that laptop got stolen. In that computer, I was using .346.

Bo

 

SD build 325 ran great on my WinXP PC for years, but I ran into a few issues running it on Win7. I've been using the latest build of SD (376) on my Win7-X64 laptop ever since Tony released it without any problems (other than it conflicting with AX64).

TS

 

Why did Patrick deleted his post about Tony not participating in the forums?

 

Hi atomomega,
I deleted my post because (although I am not happy with the current situation re user/developer communication) I realised that this is open forum and I don't want to be overly critical of Tony.
I get very frustrated because there is only a small amount of activity on the The Official Shadow Defender Forum except around the time when there is a new release.
My idea to restart the forum was so that members and Tony could have a place (similar to Tzuk and Sandboxie forum) to exchange thoughts and mutually progress Shadow Defender development in a more or less open space. I was hoping for a vibrant exciting place with plenty of activity and movement and for the selfish reason that it is much more fun to "admin" an active forum.
What seems to be happening (as Cyberman says) is that input and dialogue is happening only behind the scenes. Nobody really knows which direction the software is going in and I feel that Shadow Defender could be diminished by too many "bells and whistles" and in the process lose some of it's unique qualities. Without a broad user input and user developer dialogue I fear that it may go off at a tangent.
Personally I like the classic look and utilitarian functionality of 1.1.0.325 and I feel that a gui with too may confusing buttons and options could detract from that. The reason I first got involved with Shadow Defender was because of it's unique "classic" utilitarian "feel" and simple and easy to understand interface which allows it to be used by anybody. In my opinion over complexity in ui and function will kill Shadow Defender for a general usage.

best wishes

Patrick

 

Yeah, i've noticed ! Whoever T happens to be though, he/she/they is/are, they are taking on board suggestions & providing fixes/updates etc.

I agree, BUT the extra "features" could be hidden away under an "Experts" Tab ?

I'm on 326 which is similar, & VERY easy to use

I agree, but some new features sound good, such as RAM Cache & Encryption

 

I agree, CloneRanger progress is being made (and I'm not against that or new features) but I just don't want it to stray too far away from it's simple, classic, functionality and integrity.

 

Hi Patrick,

Thank you for your reply. It adds up to your credibility as SD's 'PR'. I sincerely agree with you. I'm still using .325 because I feel it just plain works. It has everything I need and nothing I don't want.

Don't be frustrated, your efforts and enthusiasm kept SD alive, it's been only you the one who has been on board all the time.

Regards.

 

I also share Patrick's concerns regarding the danger of making SD over-complicated. The thing is though that the new features proposed by The Shadow, Pegr, Wendi and myself don't have to over-complicate the software.

These will be simple ON/OFF options which could be combined together in a single extra tab. The rest of the software will remain as it is. If people don't want to use the new stuff they can just leave them unticked; this essentially will allow people to carry on using SD as it is today.

Malware get smarter every day and SD has to change along with them, in order to remain relevant in the future. The virtual system needs to be proactively protected. Right now the virtual system is entirely dependend on classic antimalware software for its protection. These new options will mean that nothing malicious can land in the virtual system in the first place, unless of course user error leaves the door open. And even in such a case, the ALLSector option will deprive the malware of the free sectors it needs in order to survive a reboot.

The future looks bright for SD. Assuming of course that Tony manages to code these things in the first place. As far as I know Tony is still on the research stage regarding these new options. Personally I have every confidence in his coding skills. I think that he can do, it if he puts his heart into it.

 

Hi SDMOD

You have the patience of a saint! Frankly I doubt that there is anyone in this forum who would have endured the indifference that you have endured.For a developer to treat his "lieutenant" in this way is frankly depressing, much less his customers.

Your comments below do not take account of the fact that Tony and Tzuk are entirely different people with different standards and principles. That is why the two forums are adrift, because the one person who should be taking charge (to protect his own commercial interests as well as supporting his customers) is not and probably will not.

That is why I will not buy this product. Eventually other developers will come along and replace it.


I get very frustrated because there is only a small amount of activity on the The Official Shadow Defender Forum except around the time when there is a new release.
My idea to restart the forum was so that members and Tony could have a place (similar to Tzuk and Sandboxie forum) to exchange thoughts and mutually progress Shadow Defender development in a more or less open space. I was hoping for a vibrant exciting place with plenty of activity and movement and for the selfish reason that it is much more fun to "admin" an active forum.

Terry

 

You are right, Patrick deserves much better treatment. I wish Tony would be more like Tzuk. I have communicated extensively with Tony since last October and he is a very introvert sort of guy. I also think that he worries about users asking him about the time he went AWOL. He is certainly not willing to discuss that.

This is no excuse of course. This is commercial software after all, and Tony should be in there in the forum every single day, keeping in touch with the needs and wants of his customers. I have said this to him many times and he still doesn't seem to want to do it; so I sort-of gave up hassling him about it. People must want to change. If they don't really wanna change then they won't, no matter how much prompting they receive from others.

Still, Tony's peculiarities don't take away from the massive future potential of SD. At the moment it is the only stable LV app that enables users to run a super-fast RAM-based virtual system, with system disks taking no write hits unless a user chooses to commit. My job is to test software on a daily basis and I have to say that this is a unique and invaluable functionality. Long-term SD usage in such a manner will most definitely prolong the lifespan of storage devices, and this is especially true for devices with limited IOPS like SSDs. This RAM cache functionality was what I was hoping about during my first communication with Tony back in October, and I'm glad that he took the suggestion on board and implemented it. If you add proactive system protection options to this, then you'd get an LV program that would have no equal. For such features alone I personally would put up with Tony's "quirks".

BTW:

http://shadowdefenderforum.com/index.php?topic=38.0

 

Hello guys,

I've been using Shadow Defender for months right now and so far it doing fine to me. But one time when I disable my SD to install a game and enable it again. And when I restart my computer the background in my desktop was error it says "Active Desktop Recovery". And I disable and enable my SD again to change my background but when I restart it again, the error in the desktop is still their. How to solve this thing? I'm using Shadow Defender 1.1.0.325

 

Are you using Win XP?

 

Hey majoMO, I am using version .346 and have also used .376 in my XP SP3. Never had any kind of issue. In my XP, SD works as well as TimeFreeze did.

Bo

 

Hi bo elam, the issue isn't with Shadow Defender; I asked to renod29 since I suspect that their annoyance with "Active Desktop Recovery" is a known problem with Win XP...

Specifically with key "HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Desktop\SafeMode\Components", value "DeskHtmlVersion".

We will see with renod29 answer/information.

 

I just installed Shadow Defender (Version: 1.2.0.370) last night in an old pc with XP SP3 with Avira IS 2012 as it's main security realtime app. Do allow me a couple of questions as I am a new user of SD.

When you are in Shadow Mode, isn't there a way that the user would know the changes that where made to the system before "Exit and Reboot"..? I mean like that of SBIE's 'Quick Recovery'. I was glancing on the 'Commit Now' tab and there was not any there..

Are there any issues with Acronis ATI 2011 / 2012 that you guys have experienced before?

On Macrium Reflect free...?

The thread is very long and I just started reading it so perhaps can you share some tips where in you like SD best?

Thanks.

 

I like using SD for trying programs that dont need a reboot or for trying changes in the PC to see how the computer behaves before actually doing it for real. Thats the main reason I use programs like SD. There is nothing like Quick recovery in SD but files can be recovered in various ways. I prefer to do it by right clicking on downloads that I like to keep and clicking commit. That works really nice.

Bo