I used it a few years ago, but I didn't like that it blocked some actions without asking for confirmation first.
There should always be a 'block or ask' setting. When there isn't, I guess it comes down to, are the other program attributes enough to justify putting up with the missing setting. Computers can get seriously borked when an over-active security program quarantines a system file.
Yes that can cause big problems. In my case it wasn't quarantining files, it was just blocking two programs from running, because it mistakenly thought there was suspicious behaviour. Because of this and also due to it slowing down my PC a little, I though the best option was to uninstall it.
Right, saw that. My point was that asking, versus automatic action from the security program, is best... at least for me. I mentioned quarantining system files because it's still fresh in my mind even though it happened probably five years ago, with a very populat antimalware program. They issued a quick fix, but a great many users suffered. It was the event that made me understand the importance of an ask setting
I would like to know how various AV solutions have dealt with this malware, in my case for instance ESET.
What's your first AV, why you think 360 is better than it? What can 360 provide that your first av can't? What about 2 avs on 1 pc thing. Now I know ure not a beginner so I give u the benefit of the doubt and ask u, why u think the 2 avs wont fight each other?
https://malwaretips.com/threads/hard_configurator-windows-hardening-configurator.66416/post-926676 “This malware cannot run with H_C Recommended Settings enabled. After unpacking the archive in UserSpace the user has to use the InstallBySmartscreen feature to run the executable...”
You probably won't get a lot of Eset user feedback on this one. Eset has treated anything IOBit related as a PUA for sometime.
The problem here is this statement: The name of the .dll was legit. The attacker just named his modified .dll to the same name. Next, it is common for software developers not to sign their .dlls. This also implies the user has knowledge of what .dlls IOBIt license manager actually uses. Now if one was monitoring registry run key, Win startup directories, etc. activity, the creation of the rundll32.exe entry would have been caught. But again, modifying of the key would require the user to know this was unusual activity for the IOBit license manager.
When running 360 in Performance mode, it is compatible with other antiviruses. It's not something that 360 advertise, but if you run its uninstaller, it tells you that you can run it alongside another antivirus if you switch to Performance mode. In general, it's a very bad idea to run two antiviruses together, as it can cause serious problems such as Blue Screens of Death, Windows freezing or major performance issues. However, it's okay to do it, when one antivirus has been designed to work with other antiviruses. Although not a common feature these days, Avast and AVG for example, have a compatibility mode which will also let them be used with another antivirus. In addition to that, some people are running WiseVector alongside Microsoft Defender or some other antiviruses, with no apparent issues. In terms of protection, I believe that WiseVector is a much better choice. But due to it not yet being able being to register itself in Windows Security Center, if used by itself, Microsoft Defender will still remain active. While you can disable Microsoft Defender it with Configure Defender for example, my experience has been that now and then, Microsoft Defender will become active again. Having another antivirus installed will stop this from happening. While I'll gain little in terms of protection, I do like some of 360's other features like its junk cleaner.
It's an attack that could have fooled me too, so I totally understand it. But most of the time I first run software via Sandboxie, so that might have given me a clue that it was malware. But from what I understood you was using Win Defender and it didn't protect you? Also, Wisevector StopX seems to be pretty good, but it hasn't been tested extensively yet plus it generated a couple of false positives on my system. And from what I read, 360 is pretty bloated, but it's a matter of taste.
Not surprisingly, iobit are very invasive. U download 1 product, BUY OUR OTHER 20000000 PRODUCTS ON 99.999999999999999999% SALE* U NEED EM AND THEY WILL MAKE UR PC TURN INTO A NUCLEAR ROCKET AND FLY U TO SPACE * - might be subject to further conditions
Not if u use tairiku okami's tweaks and u delete all defender folders and registry keys. Possibly only on new feature updates (such as 1909 to 2004) it might get installed again, or it might not. Proceed with CAUTION https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ClqPEK5JuAYwhvpWW9cM9uJQPvpy-TOk/view I also have my own tweaks long list but its not complete with the newest version of windows 10 so I rather not share now
I was running 360 Total Security, not WD. 360 is bloated in terms of features, but is actually one of the lightest antiviruses there is. WiseVector has been doing exceptionally well in testing at MalwareTips. On my system I've had no false positives. It did detect a few of the PUPs I have installed on my system as PUPs. I was able to easily ignore them.
OK then I misunderstood, I thought that 360 Total Security was your second AV. But bummer that it couldn't stop it especially because it claims to have extra protection against ransomware. But good to know that it's light on the system, but I can't stand AV's with too many features. I'm glad that Win Defender keeps it simple.
Ransomware gang taunts IObit with repeated forum hacks https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...-gang-taunts-iobit-with-repeated-forum-hacks/
Right, they have a more aggressive approach to advertising than others but no other product is installed without your interaction and consent. You have to check an optional offer during installation. So as long as you read what is on the screen, you have all under your control. I for one don't have problem with that. Needless to say that they are not alone advertising other products in this way.
BTW, out of curiosity I installed 360 TS via Sandboxie, and of course it wouldn't actually work because it ran sandboxed. But to me it looked pretty bloated, all kinds of processes with a very basic firewall and sandbox, not my cup of tea at all. I know you test AV's a lot so I must say I'm surprised that you are into this 360 stuff.
Basic applocker/srp which blocks executables from download/temp folders. Also for that ransomware to add keys to registry meant the machine was already compromised to be able to do that in the first place. How was the uac configured? lots of questions. I think a big issue here users tend to auto trust these software vendors, so any interactive approval would be passed by the operator.
