configuration piece for optimal performance and protection

Discussion in 'ESET Smart Security' started by zonebie, Jan 11, 2011.

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

    zonebie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    Posts:
    2
    are there any configuration keys for nob32 that will make it work at its optimal performance.
     
  2. agoretsky

    agoretsky Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,032
    Location:
    California
    Hello,

    The default settings are the optimal ones.

    Regards,

    Aryeh Goretsky
     
  3. Pain of Salvation

    Pain of Salvation Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Posts:
    398
    What about smart (intelligent) optimization etc.? Is it enabled by default?
     
  4. toxinon12345

    toxinon12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Posts:
    1,200
    Location:
    Managua, Nicaragua
    Yes, it is enabled by default in On-access scanners and Smart Scan Profile (on-demand).
     
  5. Matthijs5nl

    Matthijs5nl Guest

    So you consider enabled detection Potentially Unwanted Programs (during install) and keeping detection of Potentially Unsafe Programs disabled as the optimall settings?

    You guys could by the way consider to include the option to enable detection of Potentially Unsafe Programs in the installer, so you have two PUP options on one installer page.
     
  6. toxinon12345

    toxinon12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Posts:
    1,200
    Location:
    Managua, Nicaragua
    PUsA is disabled by default. PUwA setting is user-dependant at installation process. This categories are usually for detecting grayware.
    Definitely: add a check box to enable PUsA during EAV / ESS setup. (It was added to the wishlist by many users including me)
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2011
  7. Matthijs5nl

    Matthijs5nl Guest

    Yes, indeed. I should have written my question more carefully.

    I am wondering what is the reason why to include an option for PUwA (which I think most people enable detection for) in the installer, and not for PUsA? Does ESET consider PUwA as more effective? Or does ESET consider PUsA to be causing too many false positives?

    I am wondering because they are indeed for detecting greyware. But the most important threat category nowadays is in my opinion fake security/rogue software. Which is greyware, really hard to differentiate from legimate software.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.