Is WormGuard really what it's cracked up to be???

Discussion in 'WormGuard' started by Barney, Oct 2, 2003.

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

    Barney Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Posts:
    119
    I have trialed this piece of software numerous time, but I think I am giving up on it. I don't see what this program does that an excellent virus protector like KAV or DRWEB can't handle. I have gotton numerous warnings that a file may be dangerous to open, but it ends up not being a worm at all. Time after time, this occurs, and it gets old. It seems to me that this program may very well be more hype than anything else....just another program running in the background slowing down your system. People need to relax and trust their AV (if they have a good one) and AT. I personally run DRWEB, BOCLEAN, IECLEAN and am secure as heck. Trust me there is not a single worm that's gunna get past DRWEB or KAV, it just ain't gunna happen. I do admit that DIamondCS does have some excellet products like Portexplorer (I own this), TDS3, Registryprotector and a few other. These are excellent programs, but Wormguard I don't feel is necessary to have on my system. Don't take offense to this people, this is just my opinion and few others feel the same way. Take care.

    Barney
     
  2. Dan Perez

    Dan Perez Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    May 18, 2003
    Posts:
    1,495
    Location:
    Sunny San Diego
    Hi Barney,

    I think that allof the many registered users of WG would disagree with your remarks on it's usefulness. :)

    I have a great respect for KAV (it is my primary AV scanner) and TDS (my primary AT scanner) but I still feel that WG is an important element in the security of my laptop.

    I do also get some "false alarms" from WG but these are far different than those you would get from an AV since they do not indicate that the safe file is a certain virus but rather there are specific aspects regarding the safe file that recommend to a cautious user that they look more closely at the file before launching/opening it; and then it allows you to safely view the file so you can look for yourself.

    Also, Wormguard does not run in the background, it is not a resident program but relies on a dll hook to do its thing so there are no resources being used except at the moment when a file is being opened/run and then it is very very slight.

    Regards,

    Dan
     
  3. DolfTraanberg

    DolfTraanberg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Posts:
    676
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    In a way I do understand what you mean. The false alarms (double extensions) are very annoying, especially because you can't turn it off.
    On the other hand WG does protect you from some nasties which will be passed by any other program.
    You say that your running security programs will protect you from anything. For you I hope so, but you'll never be sure :'(
    But I do agree that it is a matter of trust you put in your programs. You trust yours and I trust mine. May we all stay clean.
    Dolf
     
  4. BWMerlin

    BWMerlin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Posts:
    71
    I was also curious as what advantages wormguard has over an antivirus like NAV. I am currently using the trial of TDS-3 which has an anti worm feature so why should I go for wormgraud if both NAV and TDS-3 have features to stop worms.
     
  5. Jooske

    Jooske Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Posts:
    9,713
    Location:
    Netherlands, EU near the sea
    Hi guys,
    TDS is mostly for trojans, but is includes a lot more these days, it has some basic part for WG worms protection too, but WG is especially for worms, nasty scripts, not based on specific worms so doesn't need updated with every new worm release, it works in many different ways for code and other suspicious parts in a file.
    I don't mind the warnings, as they keep me alert and i have the option to look in the safe mode in a file to decide what could be wrong or not wrong, different from AV/AT perograms which just block and delete or whatever without giving you any opportunities to look for yourself.
    I had most certainly alarms over the years which were not found by other defences and had all reasons to be stopped, so my computer life was saved various times.
    TDS and WG work very nice together and contribute to each other, not to miss Port Explorer to see all happening and enabling you real time trojan protection/blockage/seeing the nasty in action and investigating it's origin, while in intrusion cases TDS will give you a whole suite of very handy tools and more possibilities for registered users -- you would really miss a lot of fun and protection in your security without any of those big three!
     
  6. Mr.Blaze

    Mr.Blaze The Newbie Welcome Wagon

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Posts:
    2,842
    Location:
    on the sofa
    :Dbahhhhh its still great software and there working on a major update yeah its outdated but it does what it needs to do.

    its also reasonably priced

    oh and by the way its specific for worms thats why its better then kav-nav and so forth

    just like a real hit man or assassin or solder the best weapon for the job is one specifically made for the job at hand

    tools of the trade my Friend :cool:
     
  7. beetlejuice

    beetlejuice Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2002
    Posts:
    8,523
    Best thing about WG is that it gives you a "Heads up" on possible nasties you might not think twice about looking at. The way a lot of this stuff is discuised nowadays, you never know!
     
  8. DolfTraanberg

    DolfTraanberg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Posts:
    676
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    What's outdated in WG ?
    Who are the majority of PC users ?
    DiamondCS doesn't mislead anyone. Products are for anyone, features for those who want them.
    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=12743
    Dolf
     
  9. Mr.Blaze

    Mr.Blaze The Newbie Welcome Wagon

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Posts:
    2,842
    Location:
    on the sofa
    :Di dont get it worm gaurd is newbie frindly to easy install then install the protection switch to on and your done lol

    i think its for the majority i like my apps easy
     
  10. Pilli

    Pilli Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    6,217
    Location:
    Hampshire UK
    Tosh! So when MS sell office they are misleading ppl? I guarrentee that 95% of users do not know, understand or want to know about 90% of the functions contained within Word let alone Excel & Power Point but they are quite satisfied with product because it does what it says for them. The same goe for most other progammes.

    Yes, TDS has many powerful features that may not initially be easy for new users BUT TDS can be run to give even new users full Anti Trojan protection with just a few simple mouse clicks.

    Remember also that selling a product is just part of a company's service, the added value of support, listening to customers, timely response for help are major considerations.

    DCS's support is second to none.
     
  11. Jooske

    Jooske Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Posts:
    9,713
    Location:
    Netherlands, EU near the sea
    You might not be aware this is an Official Public DCS forum, for the purpose of giving support to DCS products, so what's against doing so?
    If you think so you misunderstood completely the specifics and functionallity of WG. A reason why most TDS/WG/PE users have a second opinion in NOD32 or KAV for instance, covering the virus protection with those too.
    As explained before countless times, WG doesn't rely on a database which need updating. No false alarms, but extra alerts on double extensions, for example. You can include more file names and areas or exclude them from detection, it's all in your configuration.
    You're very wrong again. Read the TDS forums, helpfile and the sites.
    You won't be able to compare it. We haven't betatested the final products so we can't tell you. In the meantime serious TDS users will be so much further educated in the use of DCS products in general, that we can't expect the steep learning curve for many of us even if we would understand all of it immediately: better expect so much news to discover on our systems and internet as a whole with it, discovery channel could bleach and ask for exploration rights!

    SOME? Let's call it top notch, especially when you see the new stuff in near future coming along users' way.
    Since when is two mouseclicks easy software misleading? Is that more then the average AV/AT scanner you were promoting in another thread?
    Users choose their own level of experience in using the many tools including in the suite.
    Like Wayne pointed out in the future TDS-4 family with the three separate produts users choose which combination of products they will use for their needs or wish for experience and securing their system, and i can asure you i want them all!
    As has been proven here again in action.
     
  12. Mr.Blaze

    Mr.Blaze The Newbie Welcome Wagon

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Posts:
    2,842
    Location:
    on the sofa
    actualy i know what the problem is lol

    newbies like my self are lazy

    we want everything like click go done

    where to lazy to read plain text

    galvin and wayne and jason are so busy with programing

    they never bother to make newbie frindly manueal's

    sure theres postings

    but for examole

    i bought an 80 gig hard drive the other day

    and it came with a cd that had a interactive video

    that took you threw simple steps of installing the hard drive to configuring it

    all the way threw trouble shooting

    i for one am a newbie with out limitation to imagination but am far to lazy lol

    i have great ideals but no drive or determination

    but this would be cool if they did the following

    ohhhhhhhhhh wait lol im to lazy to finish this post lol
     
  13. Jooske

    Jooske Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Posts:
    9,713
    Location:
    Netherlands, EU near the sea
    Tell me Blaze, how many buttons did you need to press to install the HD finally?

    Generally spoken Blaze, i think the DCS helpfiles/manuals are very comprehensive and userfriendly, instructive.
    With WG, what would you do with a video telling you to install and press that one button to install the protection and press the test? I wouldn't need a three minutes video to tell me that, i wouldn't watch it till the end, rather look into the helpfile and see if i find anything related to what more i need to know.
    If there is a readme txt with the d/l software, people won't read it, if it has some imperative info like to disable all the AV/AT and maybe to reboot to make sure all files are free for the best install results people will comment "no thanks, i know all that by long!"

    Think i would prefer a few instructive pages with screenshots as a quickstart and you find them in the TDS manual for instance. "Do this and that and this to be ready for the first try and after you can refine the configuration with that and look into that ..etc etc" as we need all the info that comes with it.
    The WG GUI is so simple and all is there in the helpfile, very clear and instructive, do this and this and you're ready, after you can do more configuration if you want there and there. Few seconds, no long video's please!

    BTW:
    Just remembered: i ever made a highspeed msagent supported TDS configuration script, running in a few seconds over your screen, pointing to the buttons to press and telling what and how, so in less then a minute you were ready for the first scan, would such a thing add to WG?
    (see here, mind the wrapped lines if you copy it, iron them straight and run from TDS this one here )
    Could create such an instruction (although i see them more as fun the way i make them even though it is high serious) for WG as a stand alone exe, but the problem could be we would most probably get lots of questions about getting the agent to work and speak especially on the XP systems, not sure about the newer systems yet.
     
  14. dallen

    dallen Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2003
    Posts:
    824
    Location:
    United States
    I just read through the series of replies to Barney's posting. I wanted to add my thoughts. It seems that most of the replies were directed towards wizardavc's negative comments about WG.

    Barney, I would suggest not purchasing WG3 and wait for the release of WG4. The reason that I say this is because WG3 hasn't done anything for me. My firewall and AV combined with TDS3 has done just fine. As a matter of fact I would say that WG has done more harm than good. It's caused me to have to open up NAV and click on scan files and select the files that I want to scan rather than being able to right-click and simply select scan with NAV. It's also caused me to have to manually open Microsoft Office products like Word and then open the files manually rather than simply double clicking the file itself. It also has conflicts with my other Symantec products. As I understand the problem, it isn't necessarily DiamondCS's fault. However, it just gives more reason not to own it. Furthermore, the only detections have been faulse alarms, thank god.

    wizardavc, I agree with a lot of what you said; however, Jooske was correct in pointing out your unfounded remarks. I take partiicular offense to your suggestion that DiamondCS misleads their customers. You couldn't be further from the truth.

    One last comment about the average user. I have learned a lot since purchasing TDS and a lot of that knowledge has come from the helpfile, experimentation, and a lot of credit goes to this forum and the brilliant users that post in it. However, personally I believe that security software needs to be easy to use. Actually, it should do everything behind the scenes. It shouldn't require user interaction at all. I know that many of you will laugh and give a multitude of reasons why it can't be this way. Many computer users don't have the knowledge that the users that read this forum have. Honestly, many don't want it. They simply want a computer that is secure, simple and stable. You develop a product that protects users from every threat possible (of course it won't be perfect) and you do it so it requires minimal user interaction and you will overtake Symantec. If you don't Symantec will.

    P.S.
    I know that a lot of you don't use Symantec Products and will argue that they aren't the best. Their stock says that they are. People don't want to buy a Firewall from one company and virus protection from another, and a trojan defense system from yet another. Most peoplel don't want to know what a trojan is. They just want to buy one thing that does everything. For the record, I've always owned NAV as my virus protection, I do own Zone Alarm Pro, Ad-Aware 6.0, Spybot Search and Destroy, and TDS,WG, and PE. I would love to own DiamondCS's new software "Protection" that does everything. Better firewall than ZA, better AV than NAV, better spyware and adware killer than Ad-aware...you get my point.
     
  15. Jooske

    Jooske Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Posts:
    9,713
    Location:
    Netherlands, EU near the sea
    Hello Dallen and welcome to the forum.

    The rightclick shouldn't be a WG issue but maybe the installs were not properly registered?
    For TDS (former versions) it could happen incidently, for whioch in the private TDS forum was a right-click registration script, which might be in the usersubmitted scripts as well. In the Final version which is currently for download on the site the right-click registration should register correctly, if not, run the script anyway.

    On some systems it is advisable when installing something like security software to press a moment the WG "disable protection" button and after the install and maybe reboot enable and test it again.

    In my case WG has helped to save my computer's life several times. I don't speak about false positives: it detects risks and gives you the option to ignore them or do as advised, you see if it is a minor/medium/high risk, you can look in the source of the file in safe mode so you know what it is all about and can decide what to do with it.
    It does stop malicious scripts and more if you configure that to be stopped like i would not know this adequate in other software and still being able to see what and why.

    Lot depends on your operating system and things we can never understand why equal systems with the same software act completely different from others and thus might want other measures.
    I never need to close WG for other installs f.e., i don't even remember if i ever did for installing PE or TDS upgrades, i just don't remember so if i did it never was a big point for me.

    You want it easy and i think WG is easy as you don't need to do a thing, it sits in the background and not even using any resources, till it all of a sudden might jump up to help you avoiding disasters for suspicious code. So what's easier then looking into that with the press of one button and one more to let it run anyway or close it?

    TDS: two button clicks to have your full system scan, easy, while all time the exec protection as kind of resident part protects every file without any need from us to do anything, not even pressing any button for it, maybe when there would be an alarm once in a while (i had only one over the years so i almost forgot how it looks like till i saw recently here somewhere somebody's screenshot and remembered)

    PE: nothing to do at all but starting it and watching it if you like and go deeper with some tools if you like to do so, nothing moere.

    Can it be easier? Or would you like to hire somebody to press the buttons for you? Could try to script a msagent desktophelper voice commanded which could do some, but it will take a while (the helper.exe from the CokeMachine script is a first part of such a task)

    Anyway, back to WG, it works fine together with the other products. Wouldn't like to be a single moment without it!
    Have you added Process Guard to your tools already, btw?
     
  16. Jason_DiamondCS

    Jason_DiamondCS Former DCS Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2002
    Posts:
    1,046
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    Some good points mentioned there Dallen, thanks.

    -Jason-
     
  17. wizardavc

    wizardavc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Posts:
    31
    Jooske, I just noticed your response, sorry for the delay.

    I'm aware of that. However, I think the official DiamondCS site would be a more official place for this forum. It is a little biased of Wilders.org to make reviews of products that they also host in their forums.

    I understand that WormGuard is NOT meant replace standard anti-virus/anti-trojan software, however a NOD32 or KAV user will have little benefit to using Worm Guard.

    First off, blocking by file name/file size/or even CRC is not an effective security method. It is a fact that almost any file can be named almost any standard alpha-numeric character, have any file size, or CRC, whether it is 100% legitimate or that it be some type of malicous code.

    I completly understand what WormGuard is meant to do and that it does not rely on a standard database. However, you do not understand that in real life situations WormGuard will NOT detect the majority of worms and worm like activity, including some of the most prevelant/widespread worms. I also understand WormGuard 4 will have some improvements but currently Wormguard 3 WILL have more false alarms and extra alerts than actually reacting when something truely malicous tries to execute.


    Of course I and my company will do my new tests on both WormGuard4 and TDS and I will contact you and this forum again.

    I agree that Worm Guard 3 is very easy to use and configure. However, locating and using basic anti-trojan functions in TDS-3 can be a pretty big undertaking, even for an experienced user.

    Yes, and it probably will be a significantly better layout and product than the single TDS-3 that currently exists.

    I have not said the DiamondCS support is poor in any way but current disadvantages of TDS and WormGuard are not pointed out properly, at least from my roaming of the entire DiamondCS site, this forum, and private contact with DiamondCS.

    WizardAVC
     
  18. Jooske

    Jooske Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Posts:
    9,713
    Location:
    Netherlands, EU near the sea
    Where this Official public DCS forum is located is a matter of management decision and agreements and users request, support and service.
    There is another DCS forum with the private licensed TDS users only forum included at the developers own site too.
    Further everywhere on internet is written in forums and reviews about DCS products, so it's an honor to have the official public forums overhere.

    Till now many people use TDS/WG/PE/PG/APM/ASV/ and a few more DCS tools together with KAV or NOD32 and/or more other tools if they wish and nobody ever complained about the extra layer in layered security.

    The next part sounds like a repetition of a former discussion which has been explained outstanding, where also was explained WG doesn't depend on databases which need updates nor on just one way of detection but a whole series of ways on very different levels.
    So it did save many computers, where malicious code was involved even before names might have been known for possible scripts or worms or exploits, whatever.
    If you put malicious code in your allowance list you can't expect WG to block it.
    I wouldn't call the warnings false alarms but rather alerts to look if some code is allowed, like double extensions for instance which you might not have been aware of their existence.

    Be assured every interested user (and those are many!) will jump on the products and we are expecting lots of postings, like it is with any tool and program DCS releases.
    I might suppose you jumped on the Process Guard as well in the meantime, even though i didn't recognise any posting from you there yet.

    People in this modern world should be teachable and people who are willing to learn and experience the TDS and other tools will find it a joy and privilege of using them, asking for more and more and discovering new parts we never thought could even be possible in security. The possibilities of our systems grow by the day with the DCS tools/programs and stimulate lots of creativity, which most probably has its reflexion in more areas of our being.

    About TDS is written in the TDS forums. About the coming WG is not much unveiled yet. We only know it is completely rebuild with all own ingredients and we can expect a new layout and new options.

    We are all very happy with the clear explanations and help around the clock with outstanding results as much as possible in the current situation on users' systems.



    I'm not here to convince: we always say shop around and try for yourself how it is on your system, ask questions and advice about configuration and other options.
     
  19. DolfTraanberg

    DolfTraanberg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Posts:
    676
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    wizardavc, I fail to see the purpose of your posts.
    This forum is meant to support users of DCS software, so if you have a problem, please ask.
    Dolf
     
  20. wizardavc

    wizardavc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Posts:
    31
    I'm stating that Wilders can is not independent in making reviews of DiamondCS
    products.

    Sure. Some people do want added layers of security. However, what I'm saying is that WormGuard3 really doesn't add much of an extra layer of security. I'm expecting WormGuard4 to have improvements over version 3 but there have been some plain bad programming/design in WormGuard3. The fact that double extensions of the same type (file.exe.exe, file.zip.zip, etc.) create an alert does not add any security, but creates an unnecessary alert. A file extension such as file.txt.pif should create an alert but it is one of many features which needs some improvements.

    I understand that and I understand everything under http://wormguard.diamondcs.com.au/index.php?page=features

    There are some cases where WormGuard3 does do its job and prevent malicous code from running, but the false alert/positive rate is through the roof and some basic improvements can be made (such as not blocking the same repeat extension) which would improve that. I work for a AV/Security company but there are many things I'd like to see DiamondCS improve on.

    Yes, of course. I don't use allow lists of any type myself and didn't in my tests.


    I don't have much problem with DiamondCS's freeware products since users are pretty much getting what they paid for and they are more targeted for advanced users.

    I understand that but at the same time some of DiamondCS's products are not for everyone and have major disadvantages that are not pointed out. TDS, for example, is not suitable for every single Home User and (like WormGuard) in real-life circumstances does not provide much extra protection that a decent anti-virus program doesn't. If you compare say Kaspersky Anti Virus and TDS, using TDS gives you some added protection against unknown trojans but the chance of a user coming accross an unknown trojan is pretty small.

    I'm interested to see and test the next WormGuard.

    Yes, but I think a better philosophy is for users to not need help and support in the first place.

    If beginner-intermediate users are targeted then the products should almost be configured properly out of the box. Microsoft's products are a good example of why security related features/products need to be on by default without involvement in unnecessary user configuration. If Windows XP/2000 had the proper default settings Blaster would of infected a small fraction of the users it did. Default settings are what the majority of users use and the Blaster worm is proof of that.
     
  21. Jooske

    Jooske Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Posts:
    9,713
    Location:
    Netherlands, EU near the sea
    Again, what management of companies decides it their matter, not ours. If Wilders.org has ever reviewed one or more products and is still doing so is their matter too; the reviews were there and in thousands of other sites and pages before this dedicated forum overhere was opened to serve the users asking for it.
    It enables everybody from one central place to support new users with trial versions and to compare with other products, which is very fortunate for all parties involved.
    Nobody ever complained about this extra place of service.

    Rest assured, we are looking forward for more products in future to join this place too.

    Without going too deep into the forum agreements and policy, it keeps the private licensed users forums even more exclusive, several new products are announced in that forum first, among which the free tools, which have their separate forum over there, btw.

    Most people won't agree with the not accepting this extra layer in security, most of all because we can add extensions to our own choice, among which scripts.
    You could in your allow list add double extensions like exe.exe and zip.zip if you like.
    In WG4 wildcards will be possible to ease the process of adding to the various block and allow lists.
    I have not many double extensions alerts, but that might be part of my save computing habits.

    Feel free to add to the WG4 wish list on top of this WG forum, which is checked by the developers frequently.

    >I don't have much problem with DiamondCS's freeware products since users are pretty much getting what they paid for and they are more targeted for advanced users.<
    You talk about free products people didn't pay a dime for at all so do you mean they get something worthless in your opinion? The whole of internet will not agree with you on this.
    Advanced power users were the first target, although in TDS-2 people could choose their own level menu, and WG3 is so easy to use it is for all people who can press two buttons.
    Let's concentrate on WG as this is the WG forum; if you have something about TDS better add to a thread in the TDS forum or open a new one.

    Again, you can add any kind of extension to be blocked, although i wouldn't recommend to do that with *.exe or *.com.
    That KAV and others don't block certain code is one of the reasons why people have WG. And not to forget it's build in exec protection.

    It will be every developer's dream users not needing any support, but i never came across any software which didn't need support, updates, fixes, for any thinkable reason.
    That's what these support forums are here for besides all other forms of support, the self help websites, etc. Experience all over internet learns people rather have an answer first before starting to read the pages and helpfile.
    The default settings of WG are very OK for most systems and people who like can customise them to own ideas and with the help of all the instructions.
    Windows....... hm w2k had some 65.000 errors/vulnerabilities at the date of it's release, weekly fixes and critical updates for all versions and other products till now, but put that discussion in another place too please.
    Good we were able to block any parts of blaster and other nasties in WG as an extra layer in security.
     
  22. wizardavc

    wizardavc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Posts:
    31
    Totally incorrect when it comes to changes in public products and services. It is your matter since your a user of the product and it is also a matter of any prospective users.

    I have nothing against that. I'm just saying it can make Wilders look biased reviewing programs while also hosting their official forums.

    Yes, but that is not a default setting. Again, most users, use the default settings of all products, both AV/AT and non AV/AT related.

    It doesn't change change the fact of what realistic situations users come across, and thats one of them.

    Yes, I have made several suggestions under that topic :)

    No, that is not what that statement was intended to say at all. It meant that users are not losing money by using one or more of the products and mostly advanced users are attracted so users have little to lose.

    I completly agree. However, in realistic situations and using the default settings (which most users use) WG3 doesn't add much of an extra layer of security.

    KAV will detect probably 95% of sure worm or worm-like activity that WG3 will detect and *additional* code yet does not have the false positives and false alerts WG3 has. Standard AV programs have exec protection to an even greater degree.

    Agreed but why create unnecessary support?

    That is misleading information. By default the majority of widespread worms will NOT be blocked by WormGuard. Even if your talking about configuration to block the Blaster file name what if your sent a modified variant with a different file name?
     
  23. Gavin - DiamondCS

    Gavin - DiamondCS Former DCS Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Posts:
    2,080
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    Reviews of programs were up before any forums were hosted here. Im not even going to read your comments until you understand this.
     
  24. Paul Wilders

    Paul Wilders Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2001
    Posts:
    12,472
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Quite true - and very easy to verify. En of discussion as for this item is concerned.

    regards.

    paul
     
  25. Jooske

    Jooske Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Posts:
    9,713
    Location:
    Netherlands, EU near the sea
    Going in circles, most is discussed several times before already.
    Waisting all time with repetitions.

    Why not create your own forum where you can be the management and make your management decisions, where we might expect all product support will be left out.


    Look at the DCS sites for several links to reviews, look in zdnet, pcmagazine, in the main forums, all reviews, among which for DCS products.
    All are not associated with DCS in any way, while several might have links to downloads and maybe even resellers links to the software to serve the users. And many will not be limited to DCS only, just like wilders.org overhere reviewing bunches of products on their value.
    If your own company's software might have scored less points then you hoped for, if it is in the reviews at all, than don't blame it on DCS which is completely independent of wilders in any way, as is Eset, Look'n'Stop, JavaCool, you name them all.
    This forum is wilderssecurity.com BTW. So put such discussions in other places in the appropriate forums too, this is not the place.


    Generally spoken the DCS products can be used out of the box and it depends on people's own needs to make changes.
    Remember for windows are all kind of tweaking instructions and programs to make important changes, cleaners and lot of optimisation stuff and forums, newslists, sites to inform users about every bit and byte, setting, vulnerability, fix, update and all that can go wrong or can be done different, wishes, and future views.

    DCS software in general is giving us opportunity to keep us in the drivers seat on our own system and we get educated --if we are teachable and willing to learn-- to do it even more advanced and thus we learn to use even more complicated software tools. All for our security.

    WG does block out of the box malicious scripts and more, which are generally spoken no part of av/at detection.
    Part of the driver's seat practise is looking into the source of a blocked file in the safe mode, so we still can decide how to handle with that specific file.
    You might have seen how Tassie_devils educated his kids with special configuration (some older threads in this WG forum with screenshots) as every system administrator can do for his/her users.
    I once had a file which was detected by my email scanner, the mail safe in my firewall, i still wanted to try it and WG jumped up and when i tried to run it anyway exec protection in TDS really refused to let it trough and of course it was a nasty from a very trusted site.

    Support is not created by developers --we discussed this before too-- but by the users who need or want an extra hand. It's so much easier for many to ask before reading the whole helpfile! And we are here to help where we can, as every question for all others can be a learning experience too.
    Look around in this whole forum and see what i mean.

    You still think in the concept of named worms and trojans, but leave that part out, WG is not dependent on names but malicious code and other symptoms triggering alerts. But this has been explained very deep before many times too.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.