Which Shadow Program and Why?

Placed order late last night for ShadowDefender but have not received key vie email as of yet although order was processed. Hope no problems happen on them getting that to me since I know support has been questionable but I am looking forward to using the app. Thanks again for all you input on this subject.

Gary

 

Gary,

Please post when you do receive the key. Been trialling and I may purchase SD next week, but I'll reconsider if you have a bad experience.

OTOH: I'm still flip-floppin' between SD & Returnil

SD: no reboot to shadow mode, easy to use, exceptions make it particularly attractive, basically no support, need to shut down for Windows updates.

Returnil: must reboot to shadow mode, relatively easy to use, store My Docs & Firefox profile on F: partition, good support, exit & enter shadow mode via schedule allowing for all updates.

exception: left an invisible Z: partition on computer which I can't find to remove.


...screamer

 

Screamer,

Will let you and all know here when I receive it. Can understand your concerns.

Gary

 

Hi Screamer, am confused by these comments, could you elaborate a little further.

 

he must be confused, both no reboot to shadowmode, can activate on-the-fly.

 

Oops!, my mistake, nevermind.

...screamer

 

Did you try to reinstall Returnil to gain access to the invisible Z: partition? It should show up.

Returnil also takes less clicks to get into shadow.

ShadowDefender handles partitions and exclusions.

Both are very nice. Both are actively being improved. I think it is Returnil's turn to update next.

 

I did re-install, twice. It asked if I wanted to create partition, I said no, since I partitioned my HDD. I tried to install " I think" Deep Freeze, and it wouldn't install due to "Invalid Z Partition".

...screamer

 

screamer,

Do you have C:\Returnil\RVSYSTEM.Img ? If you do that is your virtual partition.

When uninstalling Returnil, if the virtual drive is found you should be able to put a check in the box that says "Remove the Virtual Partition from my computer." Can this be done or is it grayed out? This option is found in the first uninstall window.

It is good that another program "wouldn't install due to "Invalid Z Partition"" because it is still visible. It could have become corrupted.

 

@screamer,

Received email withkey today. All is well on that point. Good luck.

Gary

 

Payment request is responded promptly, support request is not.

 

Thanks Gary, SD is performing well. I'm going to give Returnil one more spin around the block before I make a decision.

@munckman, thanks, I'll look for the img.


...screamer

 

hi

are u sure ShadowUser Pro Edition v.2.5.0.225 is old like 2 years back?? if so how do u know?

cheers

 

IF I would go for a simple boot-to-restore solution, I would only choose between those, that can handle reboot-softwares in order to remove them completely without a single trace, when I don't like them. I ditch alot more softwares than keeping them.
So my choice would be very limited :
1. FirstDefense-ISR RESCUE or
2. ShadowDefender in the future, when it has that feature or
3. ShadowUser.

 

Yes

It's called the file last modified date on my installation file for this version (Feb 3, 2006)

Blue

 

I really feel for customers who are convinced their put off. RAXCO was never like that, but that's water under the bridge now. Still i bet they have plenty of useful & helpful data at their disposal to share, but no use really if the FD version originates eleswhere now.

Like Pete, and countless others, I will NEVER part with this creation of historical proportions. I never knew a single ISR could double as well as a rescue device the way the old FD is proven to do.

You team up FD-ISR with some of those Pete mentioned already, even throw in SandboxIE or in my case Power Shadow, and intrusions in any form are useless. And thats the bottom line from this user. Once something comes thru without difficulty or problem, and in reasonable enough time, i count that as VITAL!

 

welp blue i asume than shadowuser is very vulnerable (2 years not update its algortim) compare to SD and DF and it risky to use it... right?


cheers

 

I like Shadow Defender because it runs on Windows 2000 upwards and on fat32 too.
Returnil does not run on Windows 2000 as I understand it. (not for me anyway), It needs xp.
Some of the others (eg Raxco FirstDefense-ISR) only run on ntfs and not fat 32
(If anyone knows what the requirements are for the various programs I'd be interested)

My choice is Shadow Defender, I'm hoping that the promised changes are implementable which would then make it the perfect software of this type for my needs. At the moment it is concise and user friendly and pretty stable, a few glitches to be ironed out (occasional glitch with icon removal on reboot from shadow and the problems on reboot from Shadow with Acrobat(described in other posts) and Nero de-activation)
I've had similar problems in the past with Acronis, particularly True Image (On uninstall, different versions removed all of the contents of the start menu shortcuts of other programs in whichever folder it resided, if not in it's own individual folder.
I hope that the developer of Shadow Defender continues to support Windows 2000 and FAT32, it has the potential to be fantastic. Good luck to him.

 

I'd agree. I really don't think anyone could say unless presented with a specific case.

Blue

 

It depends on what you mean by vulnerable. ShadowUser is not an antivirus application which needs to to be constantly updated. Most top notch antivirus will easily be bypassed by hundreds (if not thousands of new 0 day malware), if intentionally planted onto the system. That's how incidentally antivirus programs are tested (tests usually show 98% detection when escellent results are achieved). Do people realize how many nasties 2% could amount to?

If I'm correct the experts at Wilders have found 3 attacks that ShadowUser (and other programs) can't handle. Not many, and considering that nobody would buy ShadowUser without at least an antivirus or a HIPS, the vulnerability of SU becomes conceptual, not a likely scenario.

Now if malware writers suddenly turned their noble endeavours against shadow programs, by mass producing specific viruses to disrupt their functionality, it would still be up to the antivirus or HIPS to stop their execution.

I personally would like to see virtual programs tested the same way antivirus are tested: Given the same enormous number of malware, and see how many would manage to tamper with the virtual volume.

So far if there are only 3 attacks that can damage SU (when allowed to execute), I think this program is magnificent, and it shows: In two years nothing has ever been pick up by several reputed scanners.

Let me emphasize that good results can be achieved by several applications working together: A Virtual program (they are all good!) + an Avirus or HIPS can really give you peace of mind.

 

I made a test today. A chinese cleanMBR tool can bypass the SD easily.