Immunet Protect 64 Bit (slightly pre) Beta Release

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by alhuger, Sep 28, 2009.

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

    alhuger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Posts:
    82
    All,

    I have a build of the 64 bit version of Immunet Protect available for download and testing. The link is:

    http://silence.immunet.com/beta/protect-1.0.17-64.exe

    It still has a few days left to bake internally before I am comfortable posting it to the general public via the Immunet site but anyone who want's to give it a wack is welcome to do so. Caveat Emptor of course as it's pre-beta quality.

    This is a .17 build of our beta. The beta itself still has some way to go, we are about half way there. Our concentration at this stage of the beta is on stability and side-by-side install. After this stage we will be focusing on deploying more detection technologies and user features.

    The 32 bit version for .17 is at:

    http://silence.immunet.com/beta/protect-1.0.17-32.exe

    For those of you on earlier versions - you must totally remove your older version if you are testing this. This means removing the Immunet Protect directory as well as re-booting. If you wait for the product to upgrade itself you will not have this issue.

    The .17 release contains an overhauled UI plus additions to our cloud code to improve performance. New improvements to our python support are also present in addition to a number of fixes from user submitted bugs.

    All feedback is welcome. Either here in this thread or direct to alfred@immunet.com

    Best,
    al


    Immunet Corp.
     
  2. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,559
    Great. I'll try it.
     
  3. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,559
    Version .17 is definitely beta. .16 was pretty problem free, but I am having a lot of issue with this beta version. Doesn't always start-up, problems with it connecting to the internet, etc..
     
  4. alhuger

    alhuger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Posts:
    82
    Clocks, can you contact me at the email I posted earlier so I can get some log file data off you to help diagnose the issue?

    Thanks,
    al

    Immunet Corp
     
  5. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Are you guys planning to implement auto program updater? Because anti-malware program that requires user too check for program updates is an instant fail. Because most of regular ppl that are not antivirus freaks like us don't ever do that. They just have it there and expect it to do it's job.
    So it's important for program to automatically update itself.
     
  6. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,559
    I uninstalled and reinstalled it, and so far it is working better. If you still want log files, pm me with your email and directions.....thanks
     
  7. alhuger

    alhuger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Posts:
    82

    It does auto-update, we just just do not make it user configurable at this stage. We need to though.

    al


    Immunet Corp.
     
  8. TheIgster

    TheIgster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Posts:
    645
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    I am one of the ones who asked about a 64-bit release.

    So just as I understand, I can run this alongside other security products? I'm currently using Vipre Anti Virus as well as ThreatFire. I can uninstall TF to try this if need be, but Vipre is staying. Will that be fine to run them alongside one another?

    Edit: Well, I downloaded and installed the beta. Will it update itself as required or will I have to download new beta builds? I have it running with Vipre and TF so we'll see how they all play together.

    The install went fine as did a scan, but I noticed that Windows complained about digitally signed drivers during the install. Not sure what that was all about. I'm running 64-bit RC 7.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2009
  9. alhuger

    alhuger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Posts:
    82
    I have not seen conflicts with either TF or Vipre although we have more TF users than Vipre. The real test though will be in persistence testing. I have a system with both running now as well to test, so far so good. If there is a conflict I suspect it would be with TF first because of how I *think* it operates.

    I will check into the issue with the drivers, I suspect that's a build issue.

    Best,
    al

    Immunet Corp.
     
  10. TheIgster

    TheIgster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Posts:
    645
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    Thanks. Appreciate the quick feedback on a free product like this.
     
  11. galileo

    galileo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2005
    Posts:
    65
    @alhuger:

    Just some personal observations regarding your choice of colors in the GUI interface - meant entirely from a constructive viewpoint:

    The contrasts between your text (including the button text) and the dialog interface background makes seeing/reading very difficult. There are very few and/or very poor contrasts between active/inactive elements and selected/unselected elements. It's not a very comfortable environment to work in and has very little visual cues as to what one has touched with one's mouse...:doubt:

    On a very very positive note:

    If I understand it correctly, your basic paradigm is for treating files on the hard drive as "safe" since they cannot have gotten there without passing through some input/access vector...which is what Protect is actively monitoring....I Love It !!! Low footprint, low system demand, low resource intensity which leaves usual day-to-day hard drive and file activity un-impacted rather real-time AVs that endlessly and mindlessly check and re-check the same files over and over again when no changes could have occurred to those files without the changes having passed through Protect before being committed to the hard drive. This represents obvious common sense and a tremendous reduction in performance hits on any system...what a breath of fresh air for all systems !!! :cool:

    galileo
     
  12. TheIgster

    TheIgster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Posts:
    645
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    I tried to get someone else I know with 64-bit to test and he got the same issue with the drivers. I do wonder how that is effecting performance of your product if Windows says the drivers are not officially signed and not installed correctly.

    He also had an issue I did not have and that was with scanning. It said he was offline, which he was not so he can't finish a scan.
     
  13. alhuger

    alhuger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Posts:
    82
    Galileo,

    Thanks for the feedback. I'll be the first to tell you that my strength is not in
    aesthetics, UI's have always been a tough thing for me to judge. I will take your feedback back to the team and let them chew on it.

    I'm glad you like our 'going forward' approach for file review. We will be modifying it during the beta but the principle will remain the same.

    al
     
  14. alhuger

    alhuger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Posts:
    82
    The issue is that our driver signing failed on the .sys files during the build. I should have that fixed today. I am not sure on the performance front - it's hard to say. Other products (security products in particular) will often take a dim view of unsigned drivers playing around in your kernel and might interrupt performance. Then again, the build might have it's own organic issues. We still have not posted it to the general public but we might do so today to simply force more of the issues into the light with a broader beta.

    If you can get your friend to reach out to me at alfred@immunet.com I would be interested in helping him sort this issue. If the scan is failing half way through I would bet our agent is being killed or is cratering. Without the logs though....

    al

    Immunet Corp.
     
  15. TheIgster

    TheIgster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Posts:
    645
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    I have given him your email and link for this thread. I'm sure he will be in contact with you.
     
  16. TheIgster

    TheIgster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Posts:
    645
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    So will any new updates to the beta be posted here or will the program update itself?

    I should also note that I have recently started to see this come up on a system startup. A reboot does not fix this. Little help please...
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Oct 3, 2009
  17. TheIgster

    TheIgster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Posts:
    645
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    Well, until I hear anything back, I think I'm uninstalling this. If you have some more info or a newer beta that does not have these issues, then I may give it a shot again.

    Edit: So no response? You still working on this?
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2009
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.