Cyberhawk compared to other Free HIPS

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by duke1959, Aug 25, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    I was just wondering what anyone using Cyberhawk thinks about it, and also how you think it compares to Winpatrol Free, Arovax Shield, System Safety Monitor Free, and of course other free hips like programs? I liked Arovax Shield, it was quick to respond to new start up programs, and ran fairly light. Winpatrol had a timed monitoring protection, but I liked the features of it and although I no longer have it running, kept it for that reason. SSM free was a little hard to understand, but was kind of cool. I had to uninstall it because it didn't support Fast User Switching for two user accounts. I'm not sure about using ProcessGuard Free again, the older version seemed a little buggy, however the new version may be better. Prevx1r is no longer available, and Antihook sounds neat, but I'm a little fearful of trying it. So far however, I can say I really like Cyberhawk. It is running fine along with AOL AVS and Windows XP Firewall. I just don't know how effective it truly is as I have not seen any tests on it yet. There was a review on Beta News File Forum that claims it failed to detect a number of different malwares, but I was told not to pay too much attention to the reviews there. So if anyone else is using Cyberhawk and has also used other programs like it. How do you think it stacks up against any of them, and do you think it offers good protection? Thanks
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2006
  2. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    First u must understand that there are many types of HIPS. So u can,t compare all.
    WinPatrol and Arovax Shield are comparable as they mainly watch for new autostart, new services, IE componenets, home page etc.
    SSM and PG are comparable as they are anti-execution basically. AntiHook falls in same category. They will pop up on each thing.
    CH is a sort of behavioral blocker, other examples are OS firewall in ZA Pro and HIPS function of KIS.
    So if u compare, u should compare CH with behavioral blockers, in my opinion.
    Personally I like behavioral blockers but there are few of them and I am not even sure how good they are.
     
  3. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Cyberhawk is far more advanced than Arovax Shield or WinPatrol and imo also than ZA Pro...
     
  4. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    How effective do either of you think it is really is though? Why is it more advanced than AS or WP if it doesn't cover the areas they do, or isn't this as important as what it does cover? I like the lack of pop ups and low memory usage, but it didn't pass any of the leaktests like the Application Behavior Blocking feature in Kerio Personal Firewall did. Maybe I'm not fully understanding just what Cyberhawk is capable of. I read the website, and what other people wrote here in this Forum about it, but maybe you guys can enlighten me a little more. Thanks.
     
  5. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    WinPatrol Plus is very good, but its detection method isn't good because it check every x minutes, and use CPU unnecessary...

    Arovax Shield lacks the detection of some startup entries, like:
    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curr entVersion\RunOnce
    HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curre ntVersion\Run
    HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curre ntVersion\RunOnce

    Cyberhawk could be a very nice program, but still needs improvements on its stability. They could also add a keylogger detection feature...

    System Safety Monitor Free is very good on its area and for those who like type of software, but I don't like the idea to use old technology when they already improve it...

    You can take a look to Spyware Terminator, and its real-time protection ;)
     
  6. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Leave leak tests out of this. Thats covered by firewalls not IDS/HIPS programs. I also don't see any stability problems apart from File Blocking feature thats not working. Everything else is just fine.
    Arovax Shield and WinPatrol will warn you for ANY thing thats written into start section. Cyberhawk will warn you just for suspicious stuff. And so far from very new samples (some not even detected by ANY heuristics in any AV) it missed just 1, so it's so far been very effective.
     
  7. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    Okay thanks to both of you. I'll keep it for now as it is running quite well, and I like it better than AS, and WinPatrol bcause of what VaMPiRic_CRoW (that's a mouthful, but I like it) pointed out about those two. I consider myself a safe surfer, but since I share my PC with my wife something like PG free or SSM Free isn't the best choice. I liked Spyware Terminator, but couldn't use it with both accounts at the same time. That particular software has come along way, and may have surrpassed Windows Defender by now. What about Antihook? I'm thinking that this software would be alot more involved than either SSM and PG Free, but I am really curious if it's easier to use than I think it is, and how stable it is. See ya all.
     
  8. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    Arovax Shield will not warn you for ANY, but just SOME!

    Cyberhawk, on the startup area, will not only warn just the suspicious entries, will warn you ANY.

    Arovax Shield and Cyberhawk doesn't monitor the Windows Startup folder...
     
  9. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    You are welcome ;)

    You can suggest that on ST Forum...

    See this review: http://kareldjag.over-blog.com/article-553678.html

    AntiHook will have a new version, with a lot of new features and improvements, but I don't know when will be released...
     
  10. Diprivan

    Diprivan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2006
    Posts:
    66
    I am using Cyberhawk with Prevx, Antivir PE, DefenseWall, BOClean and SocketShield. So far so good . I am not sure if there is any benefit running Cyberhawk with Prevx? I suspect they do the same job. Has anyone run these together?
     
  11. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    If the target exists. If it doesn't, it won't warn you (i've tried adding some registry key to Startup and nothing happened). If there is a target for that entry it'll warn you.
     
  12. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    I was only refering to when the target exists... ;)
    Without target isn't needed...
     
  13. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    VaMPiRic_CRoW, I was wondering if you think Cyberhawk is over kill? And if you think WinPatrol Free is enough protection for the average user. You seem to like it over Arovax Shield which I've also used. The reason for my question is that Cyberhawk really slows down my PC as far as switching from one user accont to the other. Neither Arovax Shield or WinPatrol did this. I use FireFox with Site Advisor and No Scripts, and have AOL AVS installed which I really like. I will replace Windows XP Firewall with Comodo Firewall later this week when the new version becomes available. Thanks
     
  14. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I ahven't seen any slowdowns for regular operations. However installing Creative drivers did tiook quiet longer than without Cyberhawk. But just with Creative drivers which just confirms how much garbage it installs to system.
    Other installers were not affected. Oh and Arovax Shield and WinPatrol won't slow down as they aren't behavior based programs but just simple monitors of key system areas.
     
  15. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    I think that Cyberhawk will be a nice program to block suspicious behaviours, but it still needs a lot of work to became stable and smooth.
    This type of technology is relatively new...

    I used the WinPatrol FREE and PLUS, and find it very good, but like I said, I don't like the method that is used on it to check new entries, because doesn't block the entrie when it occur and use unnecessary CPU...

    Before I'm starting to use the Spyware Terminator, I used Arovax Shield.
    Isn't perfect, but the method is better than WinPatrol. Doesn't have the sections management that WinPatrol have, and doesn't covers all the startup entries
    To conclude: it use less resources, but have much less protection than WinPatrol.
     
  16. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    Great thank you V_C. I really liked Spyware Terminator, but will have to wait for a new version with Fast User Switching for my PC with two user accounts. What do you think of it's HIPS abilities, and do you like it so far? P.S. Hope you didn't mind me using the initials of your name.
     
  17. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    I never used the HIPS feature, so I can't tell you if it's good or not :(
     
  18. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    Okay thanks V_C.
     
  19. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    I tried it for a while, but I don't like this type of HIPS that always ask when you try to launch new program and dll's associated to them...
    Makes me crazy and don't have any patience for that! :)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.