What should ESET improve?

Discussion in 'NOD32 version 2 Forum' started by izi, Jun 23, 2004.

?

What should ESET improve?

  1. Virus detection (viruses, trojans, malware, worms...)

    59.7%
  2. Better and faster support

    16.4%
  3. Improving program compatibility

    6.0%
  4. Improving program components

    9.0%
  5. Heuristics

    9.0%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. izi

    izi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Posts:
    354
    Location:
    Slovenia
    Thanks for answers!!
     
  2. Pigman

    Pigman Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Posts:
    381
    I'd like to see better detection of trojans. I don't mean just AH, I mean updates with more trojan signatures.
     
  3. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    It does seem like NOD is working in that direction from their updates.
    http://www.nod32.com/scriptless/support/info.htm
     
  4. arrowsmithmidwest

    arrowsmithmidwest Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Posts:
    165
    Location:
    Midwest
    one thing i would really like to see nod doing is putting a report on each virus onto their website.

    Like have a virus database with all the viruses and how to remove them manually and what the virus does and all that relevant info.
    They have a few there in the outbreak section or what ever, but not ever virus.

    I have to search the web and go on other AV sites to get info on a particular virus.

    So that would be good.
     
  5. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    I 2nd this idea!! ESET should definitiely consider this.
     
  6. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Eset has been "considering" that ever since I got NOD32 in September 2002. :) If you think it is skimpy now...you should have seen it then! So, it has improved considerably in two years, which is good, but I know what you mean. It is a bit of a hassle, plus, doesn't make Eset look so great when the users have to go to competitors websites to learn about a virus! Not to mention that Eset still has the irritating habit of giving viruses odd names so that you can't find the virus on a competitor's site unless you know the name that most all other av vendors use. This, however, has gotten considerably better and this problem is a problem not easily solved. Common naming will have to be implemented by cooperation of all vendors but Eset historically has been one of the worst offenders and so I commend them for the effort recently to name in a way more universal.

    I think the lack here is due to Eset's growth and their lack of enough staffing which probably also has to do with rapid growth. This is the sort of thing that gets put on the back burner when there are too many demands on too small a staff. The best of the NOD32 sites for information is Rod's site (Nod32 Australia). The USA site is lacking. So, I ignore the USA site and always use Rod's.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 26, 2004
  7. optigrab

    optigrab Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Posts:
    624
    Location:
    Brooklyn/NYC USA
    I have wondered about this . For a long while NOD32 detractors (and some fans) have stated that NOD32 needs to improve on detection of trojans and other malware. Well, no one seems to be commenting on whether they have been doing this recently -even though the contents of the updates are easily reviewed on Eset's sites.

    I'm not qualified to look at the updates and say either "hey, they're really catching up on the war against trojans" or "darn, they're still not doing enough". But the updates look impressive to me :rolleyes: and my machine is clean - so I am not really subscribing to the notion that NOD32's biggest liability is its detection rates. Of course I feel one goal should be improved detection, but I'm under the impression that they are succeeding in this respect.
     
  8. Carl Farrington

    Carl Farrington Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    57
    Location:
    Manchester, England, U.K.
    They could start by fixing the bugs that plague the program.

    Unload (temporarily disable) AMON and your 2000/XP machine will BSOD a few minutes later.

    Run it on an NT4 machine with Exchange 5.5 and since sometime around April this results in rpcss.exe and msexcimc.exe (Exchange Internet Mail Service) using 99% CPU for ever. This is with both AMON and IMON disabled (NOD only running as an update-centre IYSWIM).


    other than that, I like the program.

    They could also do with somehow silencing the apparanet error message displayed upon install/update when a person has Microsoft Outlook installed but doesn't use it and therefore doesn't have a profile. ("Either there is no default mail client blah blah or the current user does not blah blah").

    I'll continue to recommend it to my clients.
     
  9. anotherjack

    anotherjack Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Posts:
    224
    Location:
    Louisiana
    Personally, I would be inclined to agree not only with this point, but also the issue that IMHO Eset needs to provide removal tools on a more timely basis. I don't like having to go to Symantec or one of the other sites to get a removal tool when NOD is our AV platform of choice. Not that we get infected in the first place, but still... ;-)
     
  10. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,768
    Location:
    Texas

    There are some cleaning tools here.
     
  11. norky

    norky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Posts:
    172
    Location:
    Lithia, FL
    I think Eset needs to tighten things up and act like one company instead of having all these different websites with different info on them.
     
  12. iwod

    iwod Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    708
    Honestly i would like to see the UI to be more user friendly.

    One Panel instead of 2 Panel Seperated. A bit like Symantec AV Cooperate UI. WHich i think is very good.

    And Also hugely improve on Signatrues....... which i think they are doing it anyway.
     
  13. svan

    svan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Posts:
    4
    Location:
    Australia
    I agree, ESET should provide better doumentation on detected viruses. I personally go straight to Symantec to get removal tools and info as soon as NOD detects a virus on any of our PC's. Even though I have found that NOD stops most viruses in there tracks before any real damage is done, I still like to check for suspect files and processes...just to be sure.
     
  14. sir_carew

    sir_carew Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Posts:
    884
    Location:
    Santiago, Chile
    Hi,
    I use TDS-3 and NOD (of course :) ) and I think that AH is excellent, indeed trojans detection of NOD was improved many and in my collection, it detect about 95 % of backdoors heuristically without signatures so I'm not worry. I trust more on heuristic, heuristic based AV like NOD and Dr.Web have an excellent future.
     
  15. backfolder

    backfolder Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Posts:
    72
    Location:
    Spain
    You can consult about new threats at http://www.viruslist.com/eng/viruslist.html or http://www.enciclopediavirus.com/enciclopedia/index.php,


    Maybe doing that NOD will comsume more reources. I prefer good detection and proper fix-it capability better than nice or fashion look.

    No bugs here man, each computer is a world, so you better check for another AV engine.

    My Question:
    I wonder how many virus item got NOD32 compared to KAV or RAV, in numbers.
     
  16. Pigman

    Pigman Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Posts:
    381
    The UI is already good enough, except for the Scan/Clean thing.

    Btw, I don't think anyone's mentioned that NOD's UI looks good without being overstuffed with graphics...
     
  17. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    I don't like the GUI. I want a GUI more like NAV and PC-Cillin or KAV 5.0 or McAfee. The NOD32 GUI is very confusing and difficult to use.

    I also think Windows graphics should be off by default as it is wasteful and totally unnecessary. If someone really wants that they should have to enable it not the other way around. You can't use Windows graphics on older machines and NOD32 is used on a lot of older machines because it is light enough to run well on them...but not if the user doesn't know to turn off that silly windows graphics.

    NOD32 ver. 2 GUI is a big improvement over ver. 1 for sure. ( Remember the repulsive pulsating alien glob?! I was so revolted by that thing that I didn't use NOD32 for a long time just because of that). LOL
     
  18. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    You are contradicting yourself here.

    Would you like to see NOD32 become a bloatware just like NAV, McAfee, KAV...?

    You are asking for a blotware GUI and yet are looking for NOD32 to be light? I don't get you.


    Remember, NOD32 is a tool, not a TV set. You don't need to stare at it 24/7!
     
  19. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Oh but it can be mesmerising...

    :D
     
  20. Eliot

    Eliot Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Posts:
    854
    Location:
    Arkansas, USA
    Advanced Heuristic for AMON and I'm set. Then I can let TDS-3 take a regular breaks, lmao :)
     
  21. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    My 14 year old kid is a bit of a high risk user. I use NOD32 on his machine because he is a gamer and NOD has less impact then some other AVs.

    Taking a look at his log it seems NOD32 is staying right on top of things.

    Time Module Object Name Virus Action User Info
    6/26/2004 14:29:41 PM AMON file C:\Documents and Settings\mightfox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\8XINC52J\shellscript_loader[1].js JS/TrojanDownloader.Small.D trojan deleted
    6/26/2004 14:29:39 PM AMON file C:\Documents and Settings\mightfox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\O9YJK1IJ\md[1].htm JS/Psyme.NAD trojan deleted
    6/26/2004 14:29:36 PM AMON file C:\Documents and Settings\mightfox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\CPEJSXUZ\exploit[1].htm probably modified trojan HTML/Exploit.Mht.A deleted
    6/25/2004 14:45:40 PM AMON file C:\Documents and Settings\mightfox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\OT2JQP0H\install026[1].exe Win32/SecondThought.C trojan deleted
    6/11/2004 14:49:12 PM AMON file C:\Documents and Settings\mightfox\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\8XINC52J\PopularScreenSaversInitialSetup1.0.0.8[1].exe Win32/TrojanDropper.FunWeb.A trojan deleted

    I use F-Secure on another machine because my ISP, Charter, provides it free for 3 machines. I wouldn't use F-Secure on his machine because it is pretty intensive and can slow things down.

    However, I ran F-Secure on his machine to check and it came up clean. So it looks like NOD32 is doing a good job to me.
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2004
  22. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Good to see Stan999, do you keep your son aware of how Nod is doing it's job? I think it's a good idea to do so, seen a few cocky teenagers reckon they don't need protection, until they come back in green under the gills with viruses or have been hacked. I think most of us at that age felt like we were invincible :rolleyes: My Grandfather kept reminding me when we used powertools, that we only have one set of fingers, one set of eyes etc, and they can not be replaced, to ALWAYS wear protection...

    Cheers :D
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2004
  23. sir_carew

    sir_carew Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Posts:
    884
    Location:
    Santiago, Chile
    Hi,
    I use NOD on 2 PCs. Because I'm a fan of AV, Firewall, exploits, malware and all pc security related, my family took attention to all e-mails, strange files, etc so I don't view much "action" from NOD (That's normal because we're people that know how fight to malware) however by best girl friend has purchased NOD and since that, NOD has detected many trojans that her AV doesn't (Inoculate). She is very happy with NOD.

    PS: I consider that ESET should implement a exclude option into NOD32 Scanner to exclude certain folders or files like the option that AMON has.

     
  24. tazdevl

    tazdevl Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Posts:
    837
    Location:
    AZ, USA
    FYI NAV bloat isn't gui related. Not sure why folks seem to make that incorrect association.

    It's fairly easy to code a decent gui and keep the footprint small these days.
     
  25. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    Oh, you’d be surprised how GUI affects everything. Ask any programmer.


    tECHNODROME
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.