Experiences with ThreatFire

Discussion in 'polls' started by progress, Apr 15, 2009.

?

What about your experiences with ThreatFire?

  1. It's perfect, I will keep it :)

    52 vote(s)
    31.7%
  2. It slowed down my machine :(

    65 vote(s)
    39.6%
  3. It killed my keyboard :(

    8 vote(s)
    4.9%
  4. It caused other problems (blue screen, reboot ...)

    39 vote(s)
    23.8%
  1. progress

    progress Guest

    What about your experiences with ThreatFire? :rolleyes:
     
  2. Joeythedude

    Joeythedude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Posts:
    519
    Good experiences. For me does what it says on the tin - Alerts on suspicious program behaviour - if program A tries to modify program B , installing in sys32 , startup , all good calls that my AV doesn't make.
     
  3. JimIT

    JimIT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,035
    Location:
    Denton, Texas
    Great app. Saved my bacon a few times.
     
  4. Firebytes

    Firebytes Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    903
    TF blocked/interfered with too many things on my systems without giving a pop-up or other indication that it was the cause. Also, I didn't want to possibly have to deal with keyboard problems in the future.
     
  5. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,634
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    Like he said.

    That app is in serious trouble and it just shouldn't be.

    My advice? Sell it to a developer at a discounted price or give it away to a developer/programmer that can make it into a worthy security program.

    I have lost all faith in Symantec's acquistion of PCTools and subsequently in the same process ruined TF even worse then before.

    Thats my story and i am sticking to it.
     
  6. progress

    progress Guest

    I was running it for 2 months and there was no TF action. The only action: It slows down my machine :'(

    As we can see, I'm not the only user with TF problems ...
     
  7. GES/POR

    GES/POR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,490
    Location:
    Armacham
    Well i installed the beta a few times on different images and the first time it installed in Portugese o_O and the second time as well + it flagged a legit system file
     
  8. progress

    progress Guest

    I selected "German" language but the news tab was showing "French" :ouch:
     
  9. GES/POR

    GES/POR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,490
    Location:
    Armacham
    Note i havent selected any languages at all, im dutch/english user but the beta installs in protugese for some odd reason
     
  10. spy_protector

    spy_protector Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Posts:
    5
    ya man...it rockss...:cool:
     
  11. progress

    progress Guest

    It slowed down my machine :'( Maybe I'll try the next version ...
     
  12. Warklen

    Warklen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2009
    Posts:
    107
    I like threatfire never had any problems with it yet..runs nice and light for me:)
     
  13. raven211

    raven211 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Posts:
    2,567
    It tends to be very light, even though some non-specific situations will make it use a lot of CPU-time - and then I've no scheduled scanning.

    I've told them about this, and they're aware and are always trying to improve that part, e.g. through new versions.

    It's simply a little like Prevx (yes, I know they're VERY different, but read on...) - looking at the behavior, where TF has to hook into everything. This provides very early and effective protection, but without optimization might cause what I described first.
     
  14. Joeythedude

    Joeythedude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Posts:
    519
    It does a lot of I/O according to Task Manager , but very little CPU time on my PC. ( 4 year old laptop , XP 2)
     
  15. tipstir

    tipstir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    SFL, USA
    Set the security level higher than the default is 3.. Level 4 is good. It does detect malware and the cloak rootkits too.. Requires internet community so you'll need an internet connection for it's dbase.
     
  16. progress

    progress Guest

    Wow, there are a lot of problems with ThreatFire :gack:
     
  17. LoneWolf

    LoneWolf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,408
    Tried several versons of TF and always had the same result,
    apparently ran fine for a few days then 100% cpu by TF and total freeze/lockup of pc. Had to hard reboot and do a rollback of my system for all to be ok again. TF is not for me.
     
  18. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,829
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    I gave TF every chance I could, but on my machines it just did not run well... there was always one thing or another wrong.

    For awhile there was a major conflict with avast! that just caused horrible performance. To their credit, they fixed that.

    There were frequent false positives, that I was told were the direct result of running the sensitivity level too high. Things calmed down when I reverted to default levels, and even remained tolerable when I inched the sensitivity back up a notch.

    I didn't much care for the AV scanning engine that got incorporated into the mix. Tech support seemed to always downplay that feature, which made me question why it was included in the first place.

    TF's rookit scanner never seemed to run properly for me.

    Manual updating always was difficult and glitchy.

    The keyboard problem, which I never experienced, concerned scared me.

    I had slowdowns and instability, which totally disappeared when I yanked TF. I'd been told that with its deep hooks, TF was conflicting with ZAP and its OS Firewall protection. As much as I didn't want to believe that was the case, I couldn't ignore how smooth things ran with TF removed.

    I definitely did not like it when TF was purchased by Symantec, but I tried to keep an open mind, telling myself that things would be different this time... that the presence of Symantec on the scene would not automatically create problems, which I have come to believe is a standard course of events with Symantec software. Eventually I quit going against what I had perceived over the years, and I concluded that Symantec sticking their big fat finger in the TF pie was indeed a turn for the worse.

    I was fairly persistent in my efforts to give TF a fair opportunity on my machines, dating back to the CyberHawk days. But one day, I realized that I was not being realistic. TF was just one big source of trouble for me. :thumbd:
     
  19. raven211

    raven211 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Posts:
    2,567
    Yes, ance, we already understand that you think so from reading all your (previous) posts. :gack:

    I'm fine with people criticizing the product for a good reason, believe me, but your post here and some other places are just pointless.

    I think it's good other users describe their serious problems with TF as the devs. do read the things here at Wilders.
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2009
  20. progress

    progress Guest

    :'(

    That's the reason why I started this poll. But I agree, I think it's enough. This poll can be closed now :)
     
  21. raven211

    raven211 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Posts:
    2,567
    I don't mean to be harsh, but what you write got to be based on something. Enough is enough - no offence.
     
  22. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,829
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    I value a thread such as this because after I post of my experiences, I may see some different opinions or even some concurring ones and learn more on the topic. Maybe the OP has some "history" with this program, but not all of us are aware of it and, honestly, we're not as put off by it as you.

    I appreciate the poll. :thumb:
     
  23. Arup

    Arup Guest

    Two years back I tested it with a brand new AMD dual core 2GB PC and it made it feel like a early 350MHz Celeron, hope it has improved since then.
     
  24. SIR****TMG

    SIR****TMG Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    757
    Ran fine for a few days then 100% cpu by TF and total freeze/lockup of pc. Had to hard reboot was not happy. Removed it:thumbd:
    __________________
     
  25. tipstir

    tipstir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    SFL, USA
    It's so low in system resources not like the teatimer that uses 87K and hogs the cpu. TF better than prior versions the 4.1.0.25 not bad.. It can be run server OS which I doing that's both file/web server no issues. I think you all just have way to many protections loaded on your system. IS is great for those who don't know much about security or for wireless laptop users.

    I've see such a lot of add-on SA everyone is running with TF.