Online Armor version 2 is out!

As funny as I find that comment (and not wishing to take the thread off topic) - I'd just like it on record that we were never asked to pay the toner guys, the pizza guys or anyone else

The first I heard of the gizmo review was when a local marketing company that does some work for them pitched me to market Online Armor. (It was that person who wrote the "from the user perspective" piece of the review). Note to sales people: When trying to get business, don't publically state you prefer a competitive product

While I may not like the Gizmo review, (I think the methodology was discussed to death at the time) - OA did fail some of the tests, legitimately, and when I contacted Gizmo he was actually quite helpful in passing me details of things that got past us. OA2 is stronger, in part, because of that review.

 

OA2 is a fine example of how proper beta testing can help produce a quality product. Running it now along with AntiVir PP and nothing else. This is going to stay put on my system.

 

OA 2 finally released, great news, and Kudos to Mike !!

Time to update my sig

 

Congrats Mike!

 

Does anyone think there would be any advantage, or need to run the free version of OA with Prevx2?

 

Mike,

Thx. About Gizzmo, he uses the Kareldjag HIPS test approach, which is good. But I think Gizzmo is freaking out. When an AE fails by throwing an alert, this would imply that all AV's fail any test when they alert you (same issue user has to make a choice at a AV alert: ignore, delete or quarantaine).

Now for release 2.0, congratulations. Smart thing to integrate a firewall with an anti-executable. Normally an AE throws up more pop ups than the application monitor of a fire wall. By combining those two and using the white/blacklist approach you reduce the number of pop-ups.

Is/Will there be any synergy between the blacklist Antivirus and the blacklist capabilities of the Anti Executable part of Online Armour (in the future)?

Regards K

 

The difference is - if you get the "unknown program" prompt, you need to make the call - "cancel or allow". With an AV, you get the "ARRRGGH! A nasty has been detected!!!" - so you know. BUT, if it doesnt detect it - the nasty sails right past. This is where the white/blacklist becomes useful. Every app I identify is one that you don't have you. And you (hopefully) could be tens of thousands of users one day.

The whole reason for AV+ edition of Online Armor was to include an AV engine *just to identify* known nasties.

Yes, there already is - We tried to minimise the popups as best we could.

In Standard Mode, if a Trusted (centrally) program tries to use the net - it just allows it. So, for example, lets say you run Yahoo IM, its centrally trusted - OA will just allow it to connect. You can change that behaviour if it disturbs you.

Otherwise, the firewall just asks one question - allow, or not. This is cos the normal users will not necessarily know (for example) if Yahoo IM should be allowed to listen on port 6545.

I think the nicest part was integrating the whitelist with the firewall

 

OT; I hope I get some latitude

integrity shows.
Good for you Mike ( I suspect you may have left home by now) enjoy your break.
Without getting all pompous: maybe some posters might like to reflect.
After some e-mails, and methodology notwithstanding, I still have no reason to distrust Gizmo.

LOL it's not just about Aussies sticking together. OK.

Got my OA licence at CC competition: happy as a pig in .....

Regards.

 

Just I installed, but getting error for activation, key is not accepted.

 

@ simmikie

OK so maybe I was wrong, I will check it out then, but I wasn´t too impressed with v1, and from what I´ve read on the website, it doesn´t seem like it has changed much feature wise. Do you think it´s as good as SSM and Pro Security (PS)?

 

OA2 adds a firewall (a very good one) and the protection is all kernel-based.
OA2 has a fine blend of features and it's easy to use, yet very powerful for the advanced user.

 

Rasheed187, a whole new ball game v2 is. As far as i can tell anyway, didn't try v1. Did use v2 beta and it's a great application that covers the worst. It seems the final version is even better, but i can't try it (trial is over, buy or not )

 

I'm currently watching my wife packing our suitcases, so I have to be quick.. between OA 1.1 and 2.0 there is a huge difference:

1. Moved to kernel mode;
2. Firewall added
3. Advanced features (tamper protection, termination protection, extra keylogger protection) - for example, OA2 will now resist all APT kills, all SSM kills , All firewall leak tests over at firewall leaktester (except one which is signed by the (legitimate) security vendor Internet Security Alliance - but we technically get that one) , it gets all of the SSM keyloggrs, AKLT keyloggers, Kernel mode keyloggers.
4. Run Safer - sort of an automatic "Drop my rights" for internet facing programs.

There's a couple of more detailed threads in the general help over at our support forums


Mike

 

Hey Mike, does "SSM" mean System Safety Monitor?" If so, are you saying that SSM installs keyloggers? If that negativism is not your intent then you ought to make your comment a bit more clear. Several of my clients use SSM on my recommendation, & they are now asking me if they have keyloggers on board.

 

Could this be what he was talking about? http://www.syssafety.com/leaktests.html
There also is a "Simple Process Termination (SPT)" on their home page.

 

He means Simple keylogger leak test on that page..

 

Is anybody running OA2 with Avast? I'm seeing a couple little conflicts such as the Avast! icon spinning when in the general tab and am getting many errors and warnings entries in my Avasts logs. I had to create an exception in my Avasts standard shield to stop the log entries. I'm just curious if anybody else is seeing this. I did get an error when installing OA2 when doing the required reboot, but it ended up booting normally and installed fine as far as I can tell. Other than that I like this program and am looking forward to digging into its more advanced options.

 

Thanks. Yes, that has to be what he meant. I wish he had made his statement more clear. Before I could correct the situation, 2 of my people had already uninstalled SSM. Fortunately I had a recent image for both of them.

 

Your welcome, the only way I knew anything about the tests was from reading about users talking about them on the forums. Glad you had backups . Cheers, innerpeace

 

Very quick response from them.lol

 

Does anyone have a link where OA version 2 can be downloaded from? The "Free Trial" link from the new site doesn't seem to be working. I have a license key for a free version of OA that was presented through the CastleCops giveaway and I want to try it....but I can't seem to find a link to download OA v2. Oh, and any advice to to what to expect during setup and anything that I should be made aware of beforehand would be appreciated as well.

Thanks

 

The link is working here with FF2 with NoScript. I'll paste a crippled link for you to try. This is for the one without the AV. I won a license too. If the link is against Wilder's policies then please remove or I can.
hxxp://dl1.online-armor.com/downloads/OnlineArmor_Setup_Trial.exe

As far as installing, it checks files and stuff and will give you prompts etc. I just basically allowed everything. I will go back and tweak later. Read the install prompts. I turned off my other protection and disconnected my internet connection but the install prompt said to leave it on . Sorry for being so vague, it was kind of a blur here. To me the help files look like they need to be updated to support OA2.

edit: if they remove the link, here is a Mike's post in the forum about the release. It's the 3rd post down. You may want to read the whole thread. Cheers
http://support.tallemu.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1197&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

 

Sorry - I am jumping on a plane tomorrow afternoon for vacation. Didn't think the audience here would have been that confused

 

This is probably OA's self protection stopping the files being accessed. If you exclude it, fine and nothing to worry about.

 

bellgamin's concern is valid. The experience of this "audience" is diverse. Imprecise statements can and will create confusion.

Nick