Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by bellgamin, Aug 10, 2020.
First scan time 14 minutes. No issues with that for a first scan.
Very light on system.
You're welcome. ...and, welcome to Wilders Security Forum
My 2nd quick is running...started 6:26 am local time
18.104.22.168 < cloud.wisevector.com > China
22.214.171.124 < update1.wisevector.com > Singapore
126.96.36.199 < update2.wisevector.com > Japan
....interminably long scan still going.
Just finished... sigh!
From your first screenshot #10 it shows "Enable Advanced Protection Failed", I guess.
Ahh... @Krusty Thanks
I remember now....my bad.
Pic fixed @WiseVector Thanks
It's OK. Happy to see WiseVector StopX starts to work in the right way on your PC.
Can you please tell me how did you solve the problem?
Yes, when WiseVectorSvc.exe stars up successfully, the WiseVector Service will stop automatically.
Slow scans seem to be a common problem on your machine, @Tarnak?
It appears, @bellgamin that you have started a conversation with me that I can not respond to. Also, others that I won't mention are included. Your points that you have made, are ones that I don't necessarily agree with. So be it.
Yes, I must have too many files.
Thanks for the clarification.
Must say WV StopX seems like a good option. (Maybe in conjunction with NVT OSA, or Andy Ful's SWH ....).
Long and ongoing development, light, and cherry on top would appear to be endorsement from @cruelsister (and her cat?).
I have been trying it out for a while - on an ancient netbook. All good.
No problems with WV after a cold boot this morning.
On this laptop I just run Defender and OSArmor so I can test things, I noticed in Task Manager that WV had a look at what files Defender was updating.. checking them out I guess.
It's quiet which is nice.
WV has been running on my W10 & W7 PCs in real-time for nearly a month now. CPU/RAM utilization remains low and there have been no 'hiccups'. In fact I hardly notice WV is running until I do a Quick Scan, which is anything but quick (nevertheless that's not a big deal}.
I do wish there was an easy (and safe) way to determine how effective WV is at data-theft protection, as that's the only security concern I have while running Shadow Defender (with entire drive in Shadow Mode). In that regard I have Safe Browsing set to 'Standard Protection' in Chrome (no data sent to Google) as well as a Secure DNS.
PV- If by data theft protection you mean does WV at this point have something like intrinsic anti-keylogging functionality, no it does not. Further, remember that any data-theft application MUST be able to transmit out to do one harm, thus the need for an Outbound alerting firewall.
So pair WV with CF (which blocks the data collection ability of malware and has Outbound FW alerts) and you are Golden.
Thanks for that feedback ....much appreciated.
@cruelsister -- are your settings for CF written in text somewhere? (I can't get them from your Youtube video -- my wits are too slow & my laptop's screen is too small.)
By the way -- for a key logger" to get on my personal computer, wouldn't it first have to be dropped there by malware?
May I ask what OS your machine is? So, you are running WV + WD (+ OSArmor) together? I am also on one machine but WV + Norton did not get along on this machine. My whole system locked up and became unresponsive. Eventually I had to press the power button to shut down my PC.
Win 10 2004 build 19041.450. Yes an this machine I am running Defender, WV and OSArmor. No issues so far.
Great, thanks. Later, I might see what happens when I run the AMTSO tests, unless someone has already done that. I'm interested to see what happens if both WV and WD try to grab the same file.
Any idea @cruelsister ?
@pvsurfer - CF with @cruelsister (CS) settings, you'll have to search around for it.
I would also appreciate that, especially if pinned as OP to some Comodo Firewall thread here; so as not to have to hunt for it every time.
WV + CF (CS) = indeed, would be a potent and light combo.
Detects manually downloaded malware = WD detected.
Detects drive-by downloads of malware = WD detected.
Detects compressed malware = Nil detection.
Detects potentially Unwanted Applications = WD detected.
Detects phishing pages = Not tested. I wouldn't expect a result from either WD, or WV here.
Is connected to a cloud-based lookup system = Firefox blocked this one - twice!
At no time did WV react to any tests.
Probably not a comprehensive test by any standard, just the results I found. Yours may differ.