VoodooShield/Cyberlock

Yeah, we should do that, thank you!

 

Yes, that makes sense....Thanks

 

Yeah, we have a new digital signature, so it will do that for a little while. Thank you!

 

Yeah, that is exactly what it does. There are a few places in the registry that has a lot of cool info on recently used programs, so that is what we use to build the advanced whitelist snapshot.

 

Here is a post from a little while ago that explains everything and provides a sample:

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/voodooshield.313706/page-258#post-2474025

 

Dan,
My question was never answered, do I need an anti-exploit now?
like MBAE or HPA
Thanks and 2.50 is working well

 

Sorry, I answered this a couple of pages back... https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/voodooshield.313706/page-266#post-2480000

I would keep all three since they seem to work well together since it never hurts to have additional layers of protection. I think all 3 products are highly effective when it comes to exploits, but to say that any product is completely bulletproof and can offer you 100% protection all of the time, well, that is just kinda silly.

 

Thanks, sorry I missed the first reply

 

Sorry I did not respond to the people who just let me know that VS was working great, but did not have a question or comment. Thank you!

I think I am all caught up on the posts, but if I missed one, please let me know. Have a great weekend!!!

 

Thanks Dan...I have just sent the details. No rush!

 

Dan, you didn't buy a power cable for the monitor. Poor girl...

 

@ VoodooShield

Where can I find more info about the anti-exploit feature? Can you give some more technical info?

 

When an unrecognized web app is detected; if it's not on the list = prompt.

Covers both at installation and when user installs new app.

 

Updated automatically to v2.50.

 

Thanks Dan, I appreciate it.

 

Hey Tarnak, I looked at the minidumps and the main thing I noticed was "DRIVER_IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL". Every time I have seen this in the past (50-100 times at least), it was either a bad stick of RAM or a bad motherboard, usually a bad stick of RAM. I would run MemTest86 and see how it does. Or, if you have more than one stick of RAM, just take one out and run it for a while and see how it does, then try the next stick. Eventually you will find the bad stick of RAM if there is one. Thank you!

 

Hehehe, I need to. I will make sure we have the appropriate cables for the next photo shoot .

 

Sure, here is a good description here. Please let me know if you have any other questions, thank you!

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/voodooshield.313706/page-254#post-2472328

 

Cool, thank you, will do!

 

Sure, thank you and everyone else! Have a great weekend!

 

2.50 working great on all my systems

 

when you say HMP, you mean HMP.alert3? Seems I read many posts in hmpa (&/or mbae) threads about picking one or the other, don't try (or no need) running both together, IIRC(?). I respect your opinion as the developer of VS. a few weeks ago, I just could not get hmpa3_betas to run 100% on my xp, so stopped trying at least for awhile, and then mbae went to 1.06 and mbae has played well (except with sbie -- no matter which version of sbie I tried there were snafus with mbae), but think I have a good combo here for the moment with VS & mbae 1.06 without using sbie, but would like to add hmpa3 if it would play nicely with VS and mbae on xp. I guess I could interpret your comment different ways, ie, 1) that mbae and VS play well together (my experience too); or 2) hmpa3 works well with VS, maybe; or, 3) did you mean all 3 play well together. you've run all 3 together successfully? I had some issue with VS_2.31m_beta, and reverted to 2.30, which is harmonious here. more insights welcome. thanks.
PS I know you said try 2.31n, but for now & immediate future I'm enjoying smooth sailing with 2.30.

 

I guess I missed the post re 2.50. downloaded now and will give it a spin.

 

2.50 installed and running. no problems so far, other than minor specific issue I'll pm to Dan.

 

Thanks, so it's basically a more strict method of blocking child processes.