Which one:Prosecurity or SSM or Eq*.* ?

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by Banshee, Nov 6, 2007.

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

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543
    Hi,

    I have ssm paid 2.3.612 (license expired) and I was wondering if I would gain anything by replacing it with either prosecurity or eqsecure ?


    Is prosecurity better than SSM now ?

    Thanks
     
  2. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,041
    Banshee, realistically, the only way you are going to know is to try them yourself. You will probably find have the replies say A the rest B. Even then if everyone says A, and it doesn't run on your machine, you gained nothing.

    Posters, if you reply please give some useful information. The "I like A" oneliners just aren't really helpful.


    Pete
     
  3. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543

    Peter,

    That I need to try them myself is understood.But.If posters tell me that I will not gain anything by replacing SSM with the other applications I don't even try them
     
  4. bellgamin

    bellgamin Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    5,648
    Location:
    Hawaii
    EQ does not like my computer (BSOD). So I haven't really tried it since the time it made me restore an image in order to get my computer back. I do know that Easter & others like it a lot so, hopefully, they will chime in with their comments.

    As to Effectiveness of Protection...
    SSM has been tested & rated high quality, but it was a couple of years ago HERE and HERE.

    In Matousek's recent tests, both SSM & PS rated "Very Good" but they were tested against firewall leak standards rather than HIPS standards. Those tests can be viewed HERE.

    AFAIK there have been no other formal tests of PS or SSM.

    As to Scope of Protection...
    As between ProSec & SSM, their wide scope of protection is very similar except that PS presently offers file protection whereas SSM does not.

    The proponent of SSM (Vitali) has scheduled to issue an update to SSM this month (November 2007) and has also committed himself to adding file protection to SSM. I am optimistic that he will accomplish both of those goals in a timely fashion.

    Other than as mentioned above, the choice between PS & SSM mainly boils down to whichever GUI works better for you. I have licenses for both PS & SSM but I prefer SSM's GUI as a matter of personal choice.

    For instance, I like SSM's ease of setting up Groups under the Rules tab, plus the fact that I can name each group whatever I want. Thus I have a group named "Protected" because that's the group where I assign processes that I have configured SSM to protect them from termination. I also have a group named "OK to Connect" and a group that I named "Security Apps" -- and so forth.

    I have used SSM regularly, ever since I read Paranoid's & Root's respective endorsements thereof on the Ourpost forum way back in 2002. From that day until now, SSM has given me faithful protection for all these years. Ergo, it makes sense that I am very comfortable in using it. Your mileage may vary. You cannot go wrong no matter which you choose -- PS or SSM. :thumb:
     
  5. Woody777

    Woody777 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Posts:
    484
    SSM Wroks exactly as Bellgamin describes. I have tried it but since I am reluctant to purchase a license I switched to EQ Secure. This APP works perfectly is much like SSM & is free. I had no problems with installing or using it. You can actually adjust the properties & keep it from loading at startup if you wish.. Just go into the configuration panel.
     
  6. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543
    Thank you all for your explanations.

    I will keep SSM :thumb:
     
  7. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,632
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
  8. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Hello,
    I have license for both SSM and PS,... For me personally, PS will cover such as DLL and file access where SSM will not. But, I like both (and actually like others more)
     
  9. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543

    Easter,

    I have run a search and read everything I found before I posted. I have also downloaded EQsecure and installed it. I found the software too complicated for me.Maybe I am just used to SSM and I know what's where.Not sure.
     
  10. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543


    Stem,


    Yes I would like DLL and file protection as well. You say like others more. Which ones ?
     
  11. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    May be NG!:D
     
  12. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,632
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    That's very understandable. I felt exactly the same when SSM first hit the scene, and i been fairly sharp at catching on quickly with even the most sophisticated of programs, not just security wares.

    With EQSecure i didn't feel the same intimidation as i did with SSM for some reason even though it's taken some time to fine-tune each setting to my own preferences. It's really not so complicated as it looks and IMO is actually less complex when you take the time to go over it with a fine tooth comb. In fact i lived with the default settings for a few weeks untill i really dived into it and now i can't imagine another HIPS i would trade for it.

    Still, SSM is a very effective HIPS in it's own right. I lost interest unfortunately when they changed the Registry Modules GUI and added the modest network firewall which doesn't match my Kerio 2.15, but it's over and done now, EQS is here to stay for the foreseeable future unless something even more new and impressive happens on this scene.

    Best Of Luck

    EASTER
     
  13. showtime33

    showtime33 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Posts:
    26
    I say drop em and use DSA....since install found it quite informative....
    I have used eq and prosecurity......switched to dsa....

    just my 2 cents...
     
  14. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543

    Thanks showtime33.I'll give DSA a go.Got a link ?
     
  15. tepe2

    tepe2 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Posts:
    539
  16. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543
  17. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    PS is probably for you then

    Yes, I do prefer NG. I have always liked its direction.
     
  18. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    This HIPS realy has some unique features not seen in any other HIPS.
    I wish Arman will get time to update it.
     
  19. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Which are those features which make NG unique? Thanks :)
     
  20. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,041
    Please take this to the NG. Thread. This thread is about Prosecurity, SSM and EQ.


    Pete
     
  21. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Hi Peter, let me say you are a very strict moderator. :) ( My opinion is not made today).I think a little discussion of NG in a thread with three other HIPS is not so OT?

    What do u think?
     
  22. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
  23. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,632
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    I like to just add that i been very long dedicated in my support for System Safety Monitor since it's first debut release. I already gave my reasons for slowly migrating away from it although i still consider SSM very efficient as a solid HIPS despite any recent new limitations. All softwares encounter new limitations and some like SSM are corrected in due time.

    It took an EQSecurity 3.3 to get my attention in the first place and then their version 3.4 to fully trust it as a replacement. Since turning then i've experienced no problems whatsoever but rather Marvel in all it's protection in such a Lite app with it's shielding abilities as well as highly configurable as any firewalling/rules app should be.

    Like Bellgamin, PS doesn't take too well on my machine and is Blue Screened me enough that i've become content to just waiting it out for a version that will work without issue. Others seem to revel in PS while still others yet find SSM perfect for their PC security needs. Mine untill something can convince me to change again will remain with EQS for a HIPS though.
     
  24. tepe2

    tepe2 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Posts:
    539
    From Prosecurity pages:
    I guess PS v1.40 Final will be ready soon. At least I hope so because I want to try it together with Nod32 and a firewall which I have not decided on yet.

    Between PS and SSM I have only tried SSM. But from what I have read in this forum I have the feeling that PS offer more protection with default settings. You dont necessary have to make a lot of rules, it still will offer good protection. If so, maybe PS would be a better choice for less advanced users? I am a less advanced user and probably should use.....none of them, but I dont care, I will try PS when final.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.