F-Secure 2010 A sneak peak

Absolutely, that's the way it is. We're the ones who have to make sure the plugins support the new browsers unless they are compatible already.

And, we are able to update the plugin using the update channel so as soon as the support is ready we'll provide it automatically.

 

Btw will users of older versions of f-secure get the updated hydra engine?
I have some clients using the current release version.

 

As long as they use a version of F-Secure that has Hydra then yes. The latest engine actually went out today in update 2009-07-15_07.

But if they're on a version of F-Secure that has Orion then the answer is no, they first have to upgrade to a version that has Hydra and only after that would they automatically get the new engine versions.

 

The plugins currently doesn't support 64-bit versions of any browser. FF is still 32-bit so it's not an issue but IE 64-bit is not supported. 32-bit IE on a 64-bit platform works fine though.

 

That's what I thought. Thanks for clarifying. But perhaps the description needs changing slightly. On the ExploitShield beta page it states it supports Vista and Windows 7 32-bit so perhaps it should say also, for example, it supports browsers working in 32-bit under Vista and Windows 7 x64. Just when I read it I understood it only worked on a 32-bit OS hence my query.

 

The company I work for has FS Client Security 8.01 on all of its PCs and laptops so I presume we received the latest hydra engine today! In fact, off topic, everyone has commented on how much lighter the 8.01 version is which indicated to me that FS was moving in the right direction a few months back.

 

Actually, ExploitShield doesn't work at all in a 64-bit environment currently. ExploitShield "lives" outside of the browser so it is reliant on the underlying OS to work. 64-bit support is definitely a priority for us, especially with W7.

 

Yep, you should've received it this morning. Definitely the 8.x series is much better than now than it was 6-9 months ago as a lot of the improvements we've done to 2010/CS9 are being released to version 8 as well. However, there are still many things we've changed in 2010/CS9 can't be migrated to v8 because of the different scanning architecture and engine combination.

 

Ok - good to hear it's a priority. Hopefully it will be available with the official release which I presume will be early September as with previous versions!?

From memory the business products such as Client Security get updated a bit after the home product releases so will take it that we'll see all these new technologies incorporated in the next version of those.

 

I think they want to release it on patrikr's birthday. That would be 9/6 if I am correct, right patrikr.

 

I do agree wih patrikr that testing will be the proof of the pudding. But, having malware.com as your first test bed to me, is crap. If I were F-Secure I would contact IBK about a lone study of how the new version is really going to do. For me, AV-Comparitives is still the only real proof of how something performs and not 10 damn rogue URLs.

 

Should be around that time frame, yep. Don't have the roadmap for Client Security ahead of me but it will be after the home products for sure. Hopefully not too long after though.

 

Update: I have been running 10 snapshots of either suites and/or just AVs. As of today I cleaned house and left only one. F-Secure 2010. I am not going to name the others as it doesnt matter but my main goal was system impact. The new version of F-Secure was the fastest. A suites initial download size means nothing but what it does afterwards does. My boot times, internet speed, were all quicker with this product then some that market themselves to be the best at this. No malware detection, just performance. So, take it with a grain of salt but just be polite and give it a shot when it arrives. Especially you Bunkhouse. If it passes the muster with you, I will take care of a license for you.

 

Well, the good thing about remove-malware.com is that the product gets to work as a whole (URL blocking, exploit protection, HIPS, signatures etc), he's not just testing one single component and I think that's where a lot of the other tests we see today fail. Although in his tests I think the products should always be reviewed with their default settings as that's how 99% of all the users will run them.

AV-Comparatives is doing a really great job although I personally would like to see more dynamic tests and less focus on static but I know they're doing one of those soon. And for some reason marketing folks and media loves static testing (this product has x % better detection than this other product) and F-Secure is as much to blame for that being pushed to the market as all the other vendors. Overall I'd also like to see more removal tests from the testing orgs.

What we're looking for is not doing well in just one single test, we have to do well in all of them. And not just the AV-Comparatives and AV-Test type tests but also the review type tests such as PC Mag etc. We've set very high goals for ourselves this year, let's hope we can meet them

Patrik

 

Thank you for reply Patrik. I'm big fun of F-secure for all years because of triple engines protection + fact that one of the engines for all years was Kaspersky. Just wonder how long is Kaspersky engine in F-secure AV?
Last 10-12 years or even more?

I'm not gonna to go into reason for dropping Kaspersky after so long time but i'm afraid that F-secure fame as one of the top 3 AVs by many independent test will gonna with dropping Kaspersky engine.

In my opinion adding Bitdefender and dropping Kaspersky is a huge mistake but the time will show us if i had mistake.

Despite of my deep disappointing i will give try to new F-secure and first what i gonna to do will be testing for false positive.

 

the reality is, Bitdefenders engine has never gotten the respect it deserves from members here, ever. And it was normally not due to the engine but something like the GUI. Bitdefenders engine is better then the majority of ones that we so dearly discuss here. Supplement that with F-Secures improved engines and you probaly have the best protection in a suite coming.

 

Hello to all,

I have a question concerning F-secure ISTP 2010 - is it safe to use it on this stage as a standalone security application on your computer? Also, considering that my laptop is quite an old one with only 512 MB of RAM, will it be too much of a performance hit?
Talking about the Bitdefender engine - I agree that it is a really good one despite the many problems of their 2009 product line.

 

yes it is, but the beta has closed.

 

I know but I participated at an earlier stage, before the change of engines, so I have a valid key. The thing is then it was feeling quite heavy on my machine so I uninstalled it. Is there any significant difference in system resources usage now? Also are there any significant bugs that I have to take into consideration?
Thank you for replying!

 

no bugs, just do a good defrag after install.

 

Thanks again, I'll keep that in mind. And do you think my 512 MB of RAM would handle it OK?

 

without knowing everything you have on your pc, and a lot of other factors, I honestly dont know. I really think it will work so give it a shot.

 

Yes, I think I'll give it a try, I've always liked F-secure. Just one more question. This is one of the posted possible issues in the release notes of 9.50 build 961: "Real-time protection always causes some overhead on file I/O, which can cause problems for time-critical file operations such as creating CD-R/CD-RW images." Is this really likely to happen and does it also affect writing to CD/DVD in any way?

 

I also think this. Bitdefender engine supports almost the same amount of packers as kaspersky and is never far behind in detection.

 

I've written to plenty of CDs and DVDs since I installed it and not one problem.