NOD and its signatures (Again)

Discussion in 'NOD32 version 2 Forum' started by Mike415, Jun 29, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mike415

    Mike415 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Posts:
    42
    This time people keep it on topic and no ther AV please. And if it stays on topic and is closed we know that every other topc praising NOD should be moved or closed also. So please keep this on topic and discuss only NOD because last time they claim we went off topic and I never got an answer from Marcos or anyone :'( even though he had a few days to answer. Now on the last post that was moved then closed I said NOD lacks on signatures. Then Marcos replied that NOD has AH. OK well good for NOD. AH is great but lets get back on topic Marcos, Im talking about signatures not AH. If AH was all that was needed to block viruses why would you need signatures except for removalo_O? So I think that ESET should work on signatures more because right now it is heading downhill IMO. So besides the point NOD has AH (like may other AV products) it does lack in the addition of signatures. They are slow to add new viruses submitted to them by email or other systems (shown in the other thread) and also lack on trojan detection (because people say it isnt an AT) Well if it doesnt protect against trojans I guess I can dump NOD because that is all I ever seem to get these days.

    Marcos or someone I was wondering if it was possible for NOD to work on its signature addition of new threats because I believe you guys lack on it (My support question on this thread)
     
  2. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    Eset works on adding signatures hard. Amen.
     
  3. Mike415

    Mike415 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Posts:
    42
    Would it maybe be possible to start hiring more people to help you guys add signatures then so people wouldnt be working so hard to put out the signatures? Its obviously possible to add more signatures then is going on right now.
     
  4. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    The number of Eset's employees has tripled for the last 2 years.
     
  5. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
     
  6. HAN

    HAN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    2,080
    Location:
    USA
    I cannot speak for NOD/eset or anyone else. That said, I do have some thoughts about this subject...

    I guess my feelings are that NOD is headed in the right direction, both regarding heuristics and signatures. We all know NOD tests well in objective, controlled testing and from my "innocent" bystander perspective, NOD seems to be gaining more and more users daily. So they must be doing something right, yes?

    No AV is perfect. But overall, it seems to me that NOD is following a good AV business path, including it's method of determining the best choice of malware definitions. I guess my thoughts are that if NOD is making some bad decisions regarding malware signatures (or in a bigger sense, malware catching ability), wouldn't it negatively impact their business? Bad feelings/impressions of software spreads around the web like wildfire, often in a matter of minutes. But from my perspective, this does not seem to be the case.

    Am I totally off base hereo_O
     
  7. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    If I am protected from infection it does not concern me if detection is by AH or signature.
    How about two versions of NOD32?
    • The current NOD32 that I love
    • Another that has double the people working on adding signatures but only costs twice as much because it has twice as much input into its ongoing database.
    Both would offer what amounts to the same protection except the second one has a bigger list of names for the things it detects anyway via AH.
    That way people can decide for themselves if they want more signatures or not by being prepared to pay what it costs for what they are asking for - NOD32 still protects against all the things it does.

    Or how about this? After NOD32 detects something via AH, restore to a safe location and submit it to JOTTI or another online scanner so you can discover the name of the thing that NOD32 saved you from - I don't care what it is called. All I care is that it is dealt with.

    Thank you Marcos and team for working hard on adding signatures. Thank you.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2005
  8. DonKid

    DonKid Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2004
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    S?o Paulo, Brazil
    I´m sure Eset is doing an excellent job.
    Getting more employees, like KAV and Trend Micro have, doesn´t work, because Trend Micro add the signatures, but they don´t look at it deeply.
    Kav has lot of people adding signatures, and there´s some false positive too.
    Eset Team add them, and look at it closely.Rarely there´s a false positive.
    For example:

    Ask Cool Dad to tell about any kind of virus, malware, worm, etc.
    He knows how they work, and can give you every kind of explanations about it.

    Marcos is always here to give us support, even weekends.

    So, keep the excellent job Eset Team.

    I´m very happy to be a NOD32 user and costumer.

    Best Regards,

    DonKid.
     
  9. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,723
    Location:
    localhost
    One of the reasons I have bought NOD32 is for this board and the feedback we get directly from ESET (apart from the excellent product).

    This is rarely the case for most of the other antivirus products!

    Nice job ESET!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.