New In Threatfire V4.1

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by guest, Feb 18, 2009.

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

    guest Guest

    http://www.threatfire.com/updates/
     
  2. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,633
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    FINALLY SOMEONE LISTENED AND ACTED!!!

    i'M OFF TO TEST THIS right now! (fingers crossed)

    EASTER
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2009
  3. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Hehe, few days ago i tried old version and today decided to re-install it. And it looked different. Then i noticed it's version 4.1. So far it works great :)
    If i remember correctly, this version even works on Vista 64bit.
    Nice job PCTools!
     
  4. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
    Working fine here. Maybe it's only a coincidence, but my browsing speed seems improved compared to the previous version. I think it also loads a bit faster. It's goog thing that they got rid of the AV scanner.
     
  5. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
  6. Blue Ring

    Blue Ring Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    Posts:
    100
    Thanks for the heads up Guest.

    I don't know why they just don't add the allow/deny feature to the advanced tools section, (a setting in this area which could be enabled or disabled) that way only expert user would be using it and getting the pop up warnings this way and all the n00bs they seem to be trying to protect from the deny feature would not even have to worry about it. But those who want the feature could have it.
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2009
  7. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    I will try it today at home... :)

    How is this version about CPU Usage and system impact?
     
  8. puff-m-d

    puff-m-d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    4,451
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    I tried to install it on a 64 bit machine, installation was interrupted with a message stating this version is only for x86 versions of windows :'( .....
     
  9. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    Vsta64 bits version is still in Beta I think. To download go to pctools forum and sign on for beta testing (or wait a few weeks)
     
  10. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Oh, so 64bit did not fall into this one. Oh well, i'm using Windows XP again since i'm now mostly running my Aspire One netbook.
    But ThreatFire 4.1 runs ultra fast on it. I don't think i notice any difference in performance on it. I'm certanly keeping it to suplement avast!.
    I think both together really pack some punch. avast! for existing threats and some new ones while ThreatFire is focused on brand new stuff.
    Chance of anything getting through is very very small.
     
  11. IceCube1010

    IceCube1010 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Posts:
    963
    Location:
    Earth
    Using this combo, Avast Standard Shield (Normal), TF (level 3) and Sandboxie. Running on XP Pro and Vista Home. TF 4.1 seems much lighter, probably due to the fact the AV is omitted this time around.

    Ice
     
  12. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
    After running it for several hours, i 'd say that alghough CPU-wise i don't see improvement, it does feel less heavy on the system and on browsing. As Icecube noted, the first, must be the result of not having the scanner anymore. Before it would compare everything against the scanner's blacklist. Now it doesn't do that anymore, so seems to provoke less system drag.
     
  13. andyman35

    andyman35 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Posts:
    2,336
    In your opinion is the overall protection more/less/the same as the previous version?
     
  14. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
    Well, i haven't used it as much as the older version and mind you that i don't use the community protection, but i think it must be at least as good as the last one. 3 out of 3 malware in my test, the pop ups were quick to appear and i had the usual false positive with Emule. So, overall i think it's better than the last. If not for anything else, it seems to be cause less system drag.

    EDIT: Although in CPU Time , doesn't seem to have made any improvements.
     
  15. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Yeah, TF 4.1 is very light. I'm running it along with avast! on my Aspire One netbook and i really don't see any slowdowns or noticeable delays.
    Plus protection from new threats is really outstanding.
    I know its performance from Cyberhawk days and also later when it was already under TF trademark. Matt from Remove-Malware tested it not long ago and it finished with flying colors (ie it blocked everything).
    avast! and ThreatFire really work nice together and offer protection that is hard to match. All this for free.
     
  16. andyman35

    andyman35 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Posts:
    2,336
    The system hiccups were a great annoyance when I tried TF last year,if they'd just address the issue of auto blocking I'd be tempted to try it again.
     
  17. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    ThreatFire previous version only checked the AV-blacklist after an intrusion. So this advantage should only take place after an intrusion. Intrusions are not that common enoght to justify the increased responsive feel.

    I think the the enhanced categorisaton of intrusions (which pattern recognistion easier) plus the advanced tracking mechanisme of the previous version offer improvement. Also ThreatFire sets process controls to other programs which are known entry points of malware OR show strange behaviour.

    I bet ThreatFire might have more compatibility issues with other HIPS type of programs now. I noticed this during beta testing. On the other hand it is intended as an add-on to an Antivirus or AntiSpyware application. As such it does a remarkeable job. It is remarkeable that it is improved so much over time that it does need an detailed AV blacklist anymore to detail the warning messages.

    ThreatFire in the past, sometimes took 6 months or a year to respond to a specific threat. I hope the new internal architecture will solve this (as a mater of fact I am confident about an improvement on this).
     
  18. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
    Personally i would like the "deny" option too, but i don't see it as too much of a problem, if you have an ISR program or an image to restore. The times i 've seen it in action against malware (under shadow defender), it didn't do something harmful to system files. Ok, theoretically it can happen, but for me, the most important is to make me aware that i have a malware on my pc.

    Besides, on any alert, if you click "technical details", you will see what is about to be quarantined. If you see something that shouldn't, you can allow it and restore image. Also, once quarantined, you can also review the things quarantined and restore selectively.

    So, yeah, ok, there is a slim chance that it may quarantine something vital to windows, but the chance is slim and you can view that before it happens. Use an image/ISR and that's it.

    For being a freeware, i can't complain much. Sooner or later they 'll add the "deny" too i hope. In the meantime, the pros way outshine the cons of using it.
     
  19. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
    Well, then they did some optimization anyway, because it feels better now running on my pc and since this morning my browsing also feels more fluid.
     
  20. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    With the beta adding other security programs to the trusted programs really did help to prevent this problem. I only encountered one situation in which the exe was left untouched (it was mentioned in the trusted list) and a dll was quarantained of another security program.

    There is an option to set a restore point before quarantaine. TF team is so confident they still do not choose to select this by default.
     
  21. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    Yep you are right. From 4.0 to 4.1 really was a big internal overhaul. It also could have been numbered TF 5.0. I sometimes do not get these software companies (like OA 3.0 to 3.1 which not only feels a lot faster, it actually uses less CPU cycles and reads a lot less I/O)
     
  22. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,633
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    And again, the DENY option is refused as a benefit for TF users. This disappointments me greatly because it "IS" a very useful option indeed and always has been with apps like HIPS.

    I tried it and tried to get excited but my anticipation was turned quickly again to frustration with the ommision of the DENY option left out.

    EASTER
     
  23. raven211

    raven211 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Posts:
    2,567
    ... together with creating a system restore point by default, as mentioned by Kees. I can see that too as very negative, and especially when denying is missing.
     
  24. webster

    webster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Posts:
    285
    Location:
    Denmark
    Installs in Portuguese (i guess) language here o_O
     
  25. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,121
    Location:
    USA
    I would be interested to know if it will still quarantine explorer.exe? I've experienced this once and others have mentioned it as well.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.