Prevx releases Prevx1 beta

But isn´t it a bit strange that if you go to the Prevx site, you can´t find anything about Prevx free and Prevx1? It would also be nice if there was more info (+ screenshots) about how Prevx precisely works. Btw, at the moment I´m not using any of Prevx products because it slowed down my PC too much.

 

From the documentation, it does apparently do all this. It is called SmartDefense. But I still have not installed ZA 6, since I am waiting for it to stabilize.

Rich

 

Hi all

I 'upgraded' from PrevX Pro to PrevX1 ('upgraded' because I didn't actually know at the time it was going to remove Pro, but ah well)

I've now had it for about 5 days, had a few responses from it. I've also finished reading the support & FAQ pages, and I have to say, I like the direction in which PrevX1 is heading <not there yet>.

Very basically is seems to work this way <hope this is all correct> :

PrevX Pro + Signatures =>
known good = allowed
known bad = denied
unknown = ask user
<Which is exactly the same as before, except less, and more accurate interaction>

The community database seems to work a lot like MSAS's, only it seems likely that it will be much more thorough due to the old PrevX Pro structure underneath it all.

Program execution monitoring has been added, and a single program activity monitoring has been added.

It tracks what is installed (and where it installs to), so if it's later found to be malware it can be jailed <disabled>.

It takes up almost no cpu on my computer...I get a 1.54% usage reading every 30 seconds or so.

The PrevX team is also promising more PrevX Pro abilities, and script defense (which was never part of the old one).

So I don't mind the direction they've gone...though I rather miss the customisability of the old one - will be waiting for those pro features when they come back

Even thinking of keeping the PAWS on this time around <had it switched off in the old pro> as it actually has some benefit with PrevX1, and after using PrevX Pro for half a year, I've grown to respect the product (I know that won't be the same for everyone).

 

Your opinions are pretty much the same as mine, Vikkor Prevx 1 is definitely much much faster, almost invisibly so. It will be a lot better for the less technically inclined, and less intrusive for those that are. Can't wait to break- I mean.. *see* the advanced features as as they come

 

Re: upgrade?

I only just purchased three copies of PrevX Pro for my home systems and just now upgraded to PrevX1 beta. In that process it said my PrevX Pro License had been extended for two months. I guess that means all my systems that were protected by PrevX Pro for the next 12 months are now being protected by Prevx1 for the next 14 months. I hope so! Good deal, as far as I'm concerned. And I don't have any issue with paying a yearly fee; I do that now for NOD32 and Zone Alarm Pro, so no big shakes to add another to the list.

And after having to deal with PrevX Pro's "chattiness" for the past couple of weeks, I'll be glad to get something a bit quieter! I was considering uninstalling it, but as Wayne from DiamondCS pointed out in a private email to me, PrevX does different stuff to Process Guard, and the two compliment each other...and he was very right.

Still, as I said, I'll be glad if PrevX1 beta is quieter. No wonder people were allowing malware to install even with PrevX to protect them; it's a bit like crying "Wolf!" There are so many pop-up notifications, and the text is cryptic enough that regular users would soon switch off and just click "Always Allow" to everything.

 

Hi
haven't tried this product yet
1-is it light on resources
2-is it really worth a shot.
thanks

 

Hmmmm...maybe both nothanks and richrf believe that software grows on trees.

I'm a little puzzled by griping over something that costs less than US$50. How much did you pay for your operating system? How much for Word, or (worse) MS Office? And what about Macromedia Dreamweaver? Don't even get me started on Adobe software!

Software costs megabucks to develop, and while all those products I mentioned do more than PrevX1, it still takes a SERIOUS amount of time and effort to develop this stuff. That has to be recouped somehow, and a measly 40-50 bucks is nothing compared to $2,500 for Quark Xpress.

And that only does layout stuff for publications; nothing really useful!

 

Hmm I know it's fashionable these days to bash scanners and to promote IPS , but it seems imprudent to me to run 4 different IPS programs at the same time, while neglecting scanners based on signatures.

These are your first lines of defense, and are more accurate and reliable , than a ambiogous warning prompt from Prevx1, Process Guard, Regdefend or....

I personally still use AS programs, but turn everything off, except for the scanning engine. I leave the behavior monitoring stuff to the other programs.

 

In reply to Hadi

1. PrevX appears to be VERY light on resources. Running process explorer over it's two components, each produced a 1.54% blip at varying intervals (anywhere up to about 30 seconds)

2. It's certainly worth a try. It appears to be a much better product than the old PrevX Pro, which I rather liked.

 

much appreciated

 

Well, Prevx 1 Beta is working nicely on my workstation, but is absolute sh!te on my laptop, and it's coming off now. It keeps losing the registration details and all the checking it's done...so it wants to do the checking all over again. Since this takes about four hours (or more) on my little laptop, that's pointless.

This all happened after the lastest update.

In summary, working fine on workstation, not working on laptop, so be warned.

UPDATE: One possibility is that Zone Alarm Pro 6 is interfering somehow. The laptop runs ZAP, the workstation doesn't, so this is a distinct possibility.

 

Well in my experience they never get in anyway not unless you invite them in by manually downloading and running them.

So while I appreciate the slogan of 'keeping things out except by your permission', I have never had any difficulty doing that even without the heavy guns.

Beginners I admit might have a lot of problems, but I doubt most members of Wilders are in the same boat.

I would be surprised if this is different in your case.

To hear some people talk, it's like if they didn't run HIPS, their computer would be overrun by globs of malware sneaking in without their permission.

'HIPSMAN , you are our last hope...."

If this is so, all I can say is you have big problems my friend. Merely Slapping on HIPS isn't going to save your butt.


I'm worried about stuff I do download myself though. If you ar e going to play with freeware, that's a risk you are going to take.

That's where scanners are important. Very important.

It's find running file downloads through online virus scan aggregaters but sometimes...

Memory scanners are necessary.

 

That's where Prevx1 and OA are both good, they both offer signature scanning in addition to being a behavior blocker.

I would say that for the even moderately knowledgable user, a behavior blocker is feasible. Especially programs like Prevx1 and OA which are specifically made with the non-techie users in mind. I don't think I've seen anyone say that they are a replacement for your AV, however, and just about anyone that thinks they're at risk will still be using an AT. Of course this thread is for discussing the Prevx1 beta, which is likely to only be used by advanced users anyway, since it's still in it's testing phase, but perhaps this would be a good subject for a new thread.

I'd bet that's it. Prevx1 does install some firewall components, although they are not in use yet. The driver could still be conflicting, however, although I have not experienced any conflicts with it (I'm using Look n Stop, however).

 

Do you get the impression that by 'signatures', Prevx1 and OA are using the traditional signatures that look for strings within files used by AVs? It looks more to me they are looking at the hashes of files, which makes it useful against very very common threats, but trival to fool.

It's feasible, though how useful it is really is open to doubt.
There are people going around saying that the primary goal of Prevx and HIPS products is to keep malware off the computer in the first place, if only this was true....

Some people here seem to prefer to load up multiple HIPS with large overlapping functions and run maybe 1 AV while dropping AT,AS etc.

Seems silly to me. I would rather go the other way.

 

Then why comment in a thread that was started to discuss the beta in the first place?

 

Actually, I run Firewall + AV + HIPS, with the HIPS in place of realtime AV&AS, but only when I'm not installing. If I'm installing, I'll run the AT + AS as well.

Major reason is the HIPS use less CPU than a realtime AT & AS, and they seem to work just as well (in place of a realtime AT & AS).

 

Because the thread naturally evolved to the current topic?

Feel free to use your moderator powers (if you have them) to remove my posts in this thread if you are unhappy.

 

That's enough of the personally directed commentary gents; let's remain on the topic here please.

 

A good point there Vikorr. I also happen to agree with you. I am now trialing OA and also plan to check out Safe'n'sec and then determine what HIPS program I will purchase.

I run BOClean, NOD32, Kerio 2.1.5, and RegDefend on my machine. I have heard good things about this new beta for Prevx tho.

 

It's obvious you are only here to mock people, cause trouble and stir the pot. I have yet to see you add anything other to a conversation other than constantly challenge other people's beliefs. I wish somebody would start removing your posts, then I think everyone would be happy.

 

as prevx1 uses sigantures does it interfere with any AV or AT? how about other HIPS? when i get back from vacation im gonna give several HIPS programs a spin and i was wondering how well prevx1 would work with my other security apps. btw the other HIPS im considering are OA, safensec, and winpatrol.

 

I haven't run into many conflicts yet, except for RegRun. It seems to run fine w/ the other apps you mention, although I can't speak for WinPatrol since I haven't used it.