What is your security setup these days?

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by dja2k, Dec 15, 2005.

  1. justenough

    justenough Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    Posts:
    1,549
    I'll have to read up on SRP. Are there any advantages to using SRP instead of AppGuard?
     
  2. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    I don't think there are any advantages. Only advantage I could think of is that it's system built in tool and not 3rd party.
     
  3. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    10,209
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Main machine = Norton 360 + MBAM 2 + EMET 4.1 Update 1

    Second machine = Windows Firewall + Avast free AV + MBAM 2 + EMET 4.1 Update 1 (Trialling this setup for now)

    Both W7 x64 SP1

    I'm happy with both setups. :thumb: :)
     
  4. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    I removed ESET Nod32 AV and will go with AV-free setup for a while.
     
  5. lucien_phoenix

    lucien_phoenix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2012
    Posts:
    134
    Location:
    Germany
    good luck in the wilderness
     
  6. Overkill

    Overkill Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Posts:
    2,343
    Location:
    USA
    Why would you remove ESET? :thumbd:
     
  7. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    To test how my system behaves without real-time AV installed. I also never got any virus witch I should be protected from.
     
  8. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    13,744
    Location:
    Canada
    I am not running an antivirus for a week :) and my system is fast
     
  9. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    Yes, I will do similar test. Run for a week with no AV and then install it to see if there is any impact. I might also remove Sandboxie to get normal browser/outlook startup times.
     
  10. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    13,744
    Location:
    Canada
    I noticed that after I remove sandboxie my browser pick up the speed I used to have prior to install sandboxie :)
    I have what I have in my signature and I am very fast I mean very fast :)
     
  11. trott3r

    trott3r Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Posts:
    1,283
    Location:
    UK
    Yeah i currently have been running without an AV realtime as well in my XP setup

    I do have scheduled scans of hitman pro and malware bytes though.
     
  12. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Hqsec, something to think about: In my personal experience, most delays (if any) are caused by scanners scanning Sandboxie and the sandbox when it opens and when it closes, terminates programs and delete contents.

    If you don't use any kind of real time scanner, opening and closing sandboxes ought to take about the same amount of time as if you were running the program unsandboxed. Personally, I cant tell the difference in time running an application sandboxed or unsandboxed.

    Bo
     
  13. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    Yes, that was my first thought also. After removing ESET and having no real-time scanner active there was no noticeable speed improvement. After removing SBIE Chrome starts faster than before. It looks like write redirects take some time at application startup. The startup delay is not big (less than a second) so it's not that big of a deal. Right now I just want to feel how system responds with no additional software that could slow it down.
     
  14. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Hqsec, I forgot to mention. At the time of deleting the sandbox, you might also be recoveriing files out of the sandbox. And that can cause a slight (sometimes long) delay when the AV scans the download as you are recovering the files out of the browser sandbox.

    When I used an AV along SBIE, if there was a delay, it was usually at this time (closing the sandbox). I like to add something that I think its interesting, most issues that are related to SBIE that people talk about, they all of the sudden went away for me when I stopped using real time scanners.:)

    Bo
     
  15. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    I had immediate recovery enabled so there was no recovery happening when closing browser (deleting sandbox). You're right about delay when closing sandbox - I've experienced it also (2-3 second delay before sandbox was closed and deleted). The delay was similar for container set on SSD or on RamDisk.
    I also excluded http canning for Chrome and sandbox container was also excluded from scanning.
    Overall NOD32 and SBIE are running great together and would recommend this combo to everyone who want responsive and secure system :thumb:
     
  16. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Two or three seconds is not bad at all, I think that's OK. But I know of some antiviruses that keep a hold on the sandbox for 15/20 seconds and that is bad as it makes opening and closing programs in a sandbox uncomfortable. I like my sandboxes to open and close fast and they do.

    Its been a while since last time that I installed NOD (under Shadow defender) but I used it for a few hours a couple of times and as I remember, NOD doesn't make things unbearable when closing or opening sandboxes.

    Bo
     
  17. ams963

    ams963 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Posts:
    6,039
    Location:
    Parallel Universe
    I'm using WSA.:)
     
  18. Securon

    Securon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Posts:
    1,960
    Location:
    London On
    Good Morning! K.I.S.2014 and AppGuard...Killer Duo! Sincerely...Securon
     
  19. Overkill

    Overkill Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Posts:
    2,343
    Location:
    USA
    Are you using the latest keyscrambler?
     
  20. justenough

    justenough Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    Posts:
    1,549
    Sandboxie and AppGuard.
     
  21. Jarmo P

    Jarmo P Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,207
    Whats is in my signature.

    Raymond = gorhill has decided to stop developing his HTTP Swithchboard blocker for Chrome! I do hope he rethinks that decision.

    It is a better blocker in my opinion than NoScript that can't even block first part cookies. Or as an other example when I go to an adult site like ~ Snipped as per TOS ~, I get an invisible popup with firefox/NoScript combination. Not so with Chrome/HTTP SB.

    Sites like that are filled with tracker **** and for sure can't be totally avoided. Best stay away for sure, but if wanting to surf some dubious sites, we do need something like HTTP SB.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 4, 2014
  22. FleischmannTV

    FleischmannTV Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,094
    Location:
    Germany
    NoScript never advertised the ability to block cookies and there are more than enough extensions for that. I like NoScript better because I can easily unblock elements with it just by clicking on them. In HTTPSB I always had to go through a click-orgy in the matrix. Regarding the invisible pop-ups I am not sure if you had enabled some additional blocking features of NoScript, like blocking frames and iframes, which are disabled by default.
     
  23. Jarmo P

    Jarmo P Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,207
    I have all blocked in NS from embeddings regarding additional restrictions to untrusted sites. Yes with HTTP SB set with the strictest blockings, some web content gets hidden and needs to work out. We have the freedom to use the browsers for what we choose to allow. For me HTTP SB allows more to block on a site basis thats all.

    I do like NoScript too with Firefoxie.

    You and me have also SBIE and AppGuard as our protection, though they are not mainly for privacy but instead security.
     
  24. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Jarmo, combining NoScript and Adblock plus gets rid of almost all popups for me. I get maybe one or two popups a year. You already have NoScript but you should test Adblock plus, you can install the addon sandboxed and then try this site (before and after). Good site for testing blocking popups, without NoScript and Addblock plus, you get a bunch of popups. But with the addons, I get none. And save the link, great site for football, NBA and the NFL.
    http://www.firstrowsports.bz/

    Bo
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2014
  25. new2security

    new2security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Posts:
    517
    Not much has changed. Upgraded to EMET 4.1 that's about it. :)
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.