ESET Smart Security

psp83 · Nov 25, 2007, 04:47:04

So has anyone here used ESET Smart Security? If so i've got a Q.

Whats the firewall like?

I'm looking for a new package on my laptop and need an AV and Firewall (for public places/connections).. I'm using NOD32 v3 and find it much better than my last AV. Don't know what the detection rate is like yet thou.

Regards,
Paul

Rik · Nov 25, 2007, 09:39:22

I've not used the suite, Paul, but I've been using NOD for 2-3 years (maybe more?), and it's never missed a thing that I've known about on any of my machines. I can't imagine that Eset would let their hard-earned reputation be damaged by an inferior suite.

Noreen · Nov 25, 2007, 10:23:08

Paul, You could read here http://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?s=9c0dc163dbe14214553063344737f6b3&f=89

alan · Nov 25, 2007, 10:27:03

If I can jump on this please.... After reading these forums I have attempted to D/L the trial version of the Suite on a Vista Laptop.. It starts installing then freezes at the removing back up files installation point.. The only way I can unfreeze things is to remove it under Safe Mode.. Anybody help please.?

Rik · Nov 25, 2007, 10:29:08

Do you have an existing AV package running, Alan?

alan · Nov 25, 2007, 10:37:02

Hi Rik... Yes I have BullGuard but I did try disabling before D/Loading.

Rik · Nov 25, 2007, 10:39:36

That's probably not enough, Alan. Because of the way they work, you normally need to completely uninstall an AV before trying another. In the case of Norton, you also have to edit the registry, delete files and offer up human sacrifice!!

alan · Nov 25, 2007, 10:41:51

Thanks Rik... I will uninstall and see how I go. I once had Norton and never again !!

Rik · Nov 25, 2007, 10:45:09

Quote from: alan on Nov 25, 2007, 10:41:51
I once had Norton and never again !!

I think all of who have removed it feel the same, Alan. It was a good AV in its early days, but Symantec just got a little crazy in the way they did things.

alan · Nov 25, 2007, 11:41:01

Removed BullGuard and D/L Nod.. Straight in this time, no hiccups at all.
As always Rik, thanks for the help, you have sorted me out yet again.
Its like having one's own IT consultant. !!

Rik · Nov 25, 2007, 11:43:41

I'm the original IT boy, Alan.

Glad that worked, it was my only idea...

Ray · Nov 25, 2007, 12:14:30

Paul, I upgraded my NOD32 licence to the Security Suite about 3 days ago - no problems with installation and programme seems to work fine, also appears to be fairly light on system resources, I am very happy with it so far.

Simon · Nov 25, 2007, 12:19:15

I tried the ESET suite, and didn't find it significantly different to my current F-Secure suite. Also, if you dig deep enough, there are a LOT of options to play with, and I have heard people having difficulty setting up the email scanning facilities, particularly the footers it's supposed to add to scanned emails.

That said, my current F-Secure suite has decided to give up manual right-click-scanning, so I may be looking elsewhere soon.

psp83 · Nov 25, 2007, 13:34:10

Thanks for the posts..

One thinkg i really want to know is.. does the firewall block access to NAS drives? as at work we got a few and i dont want the trouble setting up there IP addresses in safe zones. I've had this problem with Norton, Zone Alarm and Windows own firewall.

I mite give the trial ago and see how it is.

Ray · Nov 25, 2007, 14:05:26

Quote from: psp83 on Nov 25, 2007, 13:34:10
Thanks for the posts..

One thinkg i really want to know is.. does the firewall block access to NAS drives? as at work we got a few and i dont want the trouble setting up there IP addresses in safe zones. I've had this problem with Norton, Zone Alarm and Windows own firewall.

I mite give the trial ago and see how it is.

Paul, have no problems with access to my NAS drive, though I did take the option to set up the "Trusted Zone" during the install process by selecting to allows sharing on the local network.

Nick AJ · Nov 26, 2007, 14:53:08

Hi all,

I've been running the security suite for about three weeks now both on my office machine (which had NOD antivirus on already) and on the "house" PC which is on the same network.

Being an untrusting sort I've set both firewalls on to the interactive filtering mode which does prompt you to allow / reject new programs and this is working well. I'm getting the UPnP feed from the router OK and everything seems good.

The biggest difference has been on the house PC which is an older unit running xP Pro. It was configured with the zone alarm security suite but this took ages to load on boot up, or changing users. The ESET suite is massively quicker and with the exposure that this machine gets to outside influences (3 school age children) i think I'll be digging in my pocket to install this full time.

I can confirm that you must ideally remove any firewall / AV rather than disabling it otherwise you can get all sorts of problems at initial boot up.

Would be interested to know which NAS drives you guys have. I'm seriously looking at adding one to my network, especially for a central place to store photos etc., backups and also to act as an FTP server for times when I need files away from home. My favourite at the moment is the Synology 207+(http://www.synology.com/enu/products/DS207+/index.php), but by the time I add a couple of 500GB drives it's going to be well over £300. However the Synology looks a good piece of kit and it may be best in the long term

Rik · Nov 26, 2007, 15:28:47

Thanks for the information, Nick. Always good to have someone's direct experience.

psp83 · Nov 26, 2007, 16:56:39

Well i installed this package last night on this laptop and set the settings for my home network.. got into work this morning and booted it up.. it asked me again for my work connection if i wanted to enable sharing, so i guess it remembers wireless and wired configs

I've not had any problems with it today, Can access the servers and nas drives.

Quote from: Nick AJ on Nov 26, 2007, 14:53:08
Would be interested to know which NAS drives you guys have. I'm seriously looking at adding one to my network, especially for a central place to store photos etc., backups and also to act as an FTP server for times when I need files away from home. My favourite at the moment is the Synology 207+(http://www.synology.com/enu/products/DS207+/index.php), but by the time I add a couple of 500GB drives it's going to be well over £300. However the Synology looks a good piece of kit and it may be best in the long term

We use packard bell's at work... personally i think PB ones are cr*p and if i had my way, i would get another make..

Had problems with one keep going AWOL today.

Rik · Nov 26, 2007, 17:01:08

You're not paying them enough, Paul.

mrapoc · Nov 27, 2007, 11:37:21

Not sure whether to take the plunge - my uncle wants a good working security system on his new work laptop and his new pc (last pc was DESTROYED by viruses pretty much)

I'm also after something for my laptop, might get it for main pc also. I already have one Nod32 3.0 license until 2008 (oct). betterantivirus.com add the ESS license ontop of your current license (not sure if eset.co.uk does this)

Wondering my best option?

Rik · Nov 27, 2007, 11:38:58

Afaik, Sam, Eset will upgrade a sub.

alan · Nov 27, 2007, 11:43:22

Is there any pitfalls in ordering from a USA site like betterantivirus.com than from the UK. ? It works out cheaper from the USA with the dollar the way it is.. I'm on trial D/L at the moment. I suppose all I want is a registration number.
.
Thanks

Rik · Nov 27, 2007, 11:45:12

If they'll sell to you, I can't see a problem, tbh. With most support handled via the web these days, you lose very little.

Nick AJ · Nov 27, 2007, 12:34:20

Quote from: alan on Nov 27, 2007, 11:43:22
Is there any pitfalls in ordering from a USA site like betterantivirus.com than from the UK. ? It works out cheaper from the USA with the dollar the way it is.. I'm on trial D/L at the moment. I suppose all I want is a registration number.
.
Thanks

You may find you get diverted to a UK site when you order. I think that happened to me last time.

And yes they will upgrade an A/V package to full security.

mrapoc · Nov 27, 2007, 13:25:57

But is it worth it? What do you get extra other than a firewall? (Is the firewall as good/better than comodo?)

Simon · Nov 27, 2007, 21:36:30

One advantage with suites, as opposed to separates, is that there is less likelihood of conflicts or compatibility issues with different brands of security software. OTOH, it could be argued that if a suite 'goes down', then you lose all your security in one swoop, but I've never heard of that happening.

Rik · Nov 28, 2007, 00:24:39

No, but the argument is valid for hifi.

Simon · Nov 28, 2007, 00:30:30

Probably true, Rik. I have always mixed and matched, because I have never been able to spend what I would have wanted to spend on a complete, one brand kit, all in one go, and I tend to replace components either if they pack up, or are superseded by newer technologies. I do like Sony though, and have more of their equipment than anyone elses.

Rik · Nov 28, 2007, 01:10:01

I've used many brands over the years, but having discovered Meridian, I would find it hard to move to anything else now (except some even more expensive brands). I'm just hoping that, come the day, Sue understands why I want to spend £6K on some speakers.

psp83 · Dec 01, 2007, 12:18:13

6k on speakers? They made out of gold?

I thought my surround sound speakers was expensive at £150

Oh and back on subject.. ESS has been running now for a while on my laptop and gets used everyday and you dont notice its there except for the popup saying its been updated. I've put the firewall through a test and it passed the basic tests.. Haven't had time to do any better tests though..

Rik · Dec 01, 2007, 12:36:49

Quote from: psp83 on Dec 01, 2007, 12:18:13
6k on speakers? They made out of gold?

There's a fair bit of gold in them, Paul, but it's the quality you're paying for (that and the dealer markup).

alan · Dec 06, 2007, 09:13:07

Well after running the trial for a few weeks it appears much faster on my system than my BullGuard one. So I decided to go for it and get it from the USA site.. I got the two license (other for lappy) and it cost a total of £33.74 against a license for one from the UK at £39.99. Good old dollar.
.

Rik · Dec 06, 2007, 09:22:35

Well done, Alan.

Simon · Dec 06, 2007, 21:33:02

Oh, that's not a bad deal actually. I may have to have another look at that.

Currently toying with reinstalling Kaspersky, as I have a couple of old licences for that, which would still work on the new version. Only thing I don't like about it is the firewall.

Gary · Dec 06, 2007, 21:59:32

Quote from: Simon on Dec 06, 2007, 21:33:02
Oh, that's not a bad deal actually. I may have to have another look at that. Currently toying with reinstalling Kaspersky, as I have a couple of old licences for that, which would still work on the new version. Only thing I don't like about it is the firewall.

The firewall actually got a good review from matousec Simon, download version 7 if your license was for V6 and just use the new one

Simon · Dec 06, 2007, 22:41:07

Has it still got that stupid drop down menu of options on the firewall, Gary? I seem to remember it asking about a dozen times a night to allow some apps, when I was definitely ticking the box to remember the answer. I know I can turn off Training Mode, but I don't like to give it carte blanche to go it alone.

Gary · Dec 06, 2007, 23:31:16

It still asks you, it has a pop up like zone alarm, or you can manually add apps you want to be monitored, it covers in default mode the essential windows services and quite a few programs anyway, and you can add programs manually if you want which will be monitored. The setting you are on about should not be called low security really, as the firewall is monitoring anything in the default list Simon, it has an allow all setting which is the next setting down in the firewall control, so that tag low security is misleading also the pdm and registry modules monitor all actions in the system as well, along with rootkits etc so you are well protected. V8 will incorporate a better firewall recognition, but it took me only a few days to train my firewall in training mode, but the standard mode is perfectly safe.

Simon · Dec 06, 2007, 23:35:29

OK, thanks Gary. I like the look of ESET Smart Security, but the price is a little off putting at the moment, given that I can usually find OEM versions of software to purchase, and can't seem to find one for ESET.

Gary · Dec 06, 2007, 23:46:33

I like ad blocking for poison banners etc which the eset suite does not offer, also registry protection is great for finding intrusions from malware as well, so I'll avoid eset as I won't use add muncher etc, also its not so great at spyware and malware as some other suites like the F-secure one and avira etc, its all about personal preference and what you need and prefer I don't thing there is ever a perfect suite, I mean Norton has better virus detection ratings that Eset, Kaspersky and Sophos

but its evil to remove

Simon · Dec 07, 2007, 00:06:06

F-Secure is fine on my laptop, and it's still my favourite suite, but it's very fussy about what else is on the machine, and seems to want exclusivity. It's never worked 100% brilliantly on my desktop, even after a reinstallation of Windows, and each version seems to have a different problem, although 2007 seemed to work best. 2008 is now installed, but the right-click manual scan doesn't work, and once again they are blaming something else on my machine, even though others have also reported the fault on the F-Secure forums.

Gary · Dec 07, 2007, 12:44:28

Its so difficult to code for every machine Simon, all our boxes have different hardware and software configurations that's the problem, I think once you find a security suite that works and does what it says on the tin swapping them seems to eventually cause issue as they put hooks in deeply, I know its harder for Vista machines as well, I used to love NOD32 but it didnt like my motherboards built in hardware firewall, or Asus mobo monitoring program, for me in the end since I want no adverts both for security and speed of browsing I choose Kaspersky 6 and now 7, Eset Smart security does not have what I need personally feature wise, if it did I would have no hesitation in using it. You can't guarantee things will not clash these days it seems, a lot security vendors are saying to solely use their products to avoid conflicts and as I guess malware gets more insidious this will probably be the case more often than not as other products may well interfere $:-\$

Simon · Dec 07, 2007, 21:02:36

Exclusivity would be fine, Gary, but no one program can claim to find 100% of all malware / spyware, which is why, most security conscious users have at least two spyware apps on board. I have given F-Secure as much sole usage as I am willing to, and have no other 'running' spyware programs, but I do have a couple of other 'on demand' scanners on board. The trouble with F-Secure is, they will immediately look at blaming my machine for any problems. They once told me to remove Mail Washer, so it's not even just security programs they don't like!

I'll probably install KIS7 over the weekend and see how it runs, but it slightly aggrieves me to waste half a year's license with FSIS, because the program has suddenly stopped working properly.

Gary · Dec 07, 2007, 21:15:15

I can understand Simon I use a on demand scanner as well as Kaspersky 7 and it has never found anything apart from the occasional cookie, alas mixing active protection seems to be the problem $:-\$

Rik · Dec 08, 2007, 09:11:18

Quote from: Simon on Dec 07, 2007, 21:02:36
no one program can claim to find 100% of all malware / spyware

It's curious, isn't it. We all have a single AV program and expect it to be effective.

When it comes to malware, though, we accept having to run two apps to be effective. I wonder if that reflects how malware apps were only used by us geeks originally, and grew up as freebies? Should we still accept that no one app can do a thorough job?

Gary · Dec 08, 2007, 09:49:27

Quote from: Rik on Dec 08, 2007, 09:11:18
It's curious, isn't it. We all have a single AV program and expect it to be effective.

When it comes to malware, though, we accept having to run two apps to be effective. I wonder if that reflects how malware apps were only used by us geeks originally, and grew up as freebies? Should we still accept that no one app can do a thorough job?

Funny you should mention that Rik here's a quote and a link about this subject "Are You Wasting Your Money Buying Antispyware Software?" http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,140211-c,spyware/article.html# it says that most modern AV's are good at finding spyware so a freebie like for me, superantispyware are pretty much all you may need, seems like the paranoia feelings a few of us get about markets creating needs may just right, as in the market for pay antispyware applications. Could it be there just to skim money off us maybe $:-\$

Rik · Dec 08, 2007, 09:54:35

I think malware is a real issue, Gary, but as you say, much of it is dealt with by a good AV program. The things that are usually picked up on my machine as malware are usually tracking cookies - nothing more sinister. If I clear my cookies before scanning, something I do every day, nothing is discovered.

I suspect that good 'personal hygiene' accompanied by good AV would be adequate protection for most people. Of course, we'll never know unless we do nothing...

Gary · Dec 08, 2007, 10:06:39

I agree Rik Malware is a real problem but safe browsing a good AV which scans in realtime and common sense not to download that free antipsyware program called spybotscleanupallnow from a pop up always helps, I do various scans and like you it may find tracking cookies even tough I have modified FF's networkcookiebehaviour to help mitigate this but if I delete all my cookies then that does not occur, common sense goes along way, and a free on demand scanner may be all that is needed.

Inactive · Dec 08, 2007, 11:13:01

I only use " free " stuff, AVG, Superantispyware, Microsoft Defender, Spybot S&D, Comodo Firewall......never had a problem.

Crosses fingers and toes.

Rik · Dec 08, 2007, 11:16:54

You forgot the eyes, In.

Inactive · Dec 08, 2007, 11:19:34

I did...and them...

mrapoc · Dec 08, 2007, 11:56:21

I am now on linux

/laughs at those needing antivirus

/remembers I have an xp partition for games

./Damnit!!

Rik · Dec 08, 2007, 11:59:07

Remember, Sam, that viruses follow the market - they'll reach you eventually.

Simon · Dec 08, 2007, 13:03:33

Quote from: Inactive on Dec 08, 2007, 11:13:01
I only use " free " stuff, AVG, Superantispyware, Microsoft Defender, Spybot S&D, Comodo Firewall......never had a problem.

Crosses fingers and toes.

I have always been a little but wary of 'free' stuff, especially when it comes to security and file protection. I may be being cynical, but I fail to see why anyone would go to the trouble of producing a product that does exactly what a 'paid for' product would do, and to the same standards, then give it away? If you had two burglar alarm shops in your high street, one was selling 'total home security' for £1000, and the other was claiming to offer the same for free, would you not be a little sceptical about the capabilities of the free one?

Not knocking your setup, In, and if it works for you, and keeps your PC safe, then that's brilliant! I'm just saying that personally, I feel more secure with 'paid for' PC protection.

Rik · Dec 08, 2007, 13:06:30

I tend to feel the same, Simon. We may be wrong, but I prefer to have a contract so that I can blame someone if things go pear shaped.

Inactive · Dec 08, 2007, 13:13:21

Fair comment Simon, but we are not comparing " Burglar Alarms " from an an obscure quantity.

The companies that I have listed all have a good track record, why they choose to give there stuff away for free isn't really of any great interest or concern to me, they do, so I just use it.

I do use the internet somewhat wisely, as I am sure you do Simon, so I consider my system quite safe.

Apart from everything else, I am a tite buttocks, so I cannot see the point in spending out when it isn't necessary or beneficial. To each his / her own I guess.

I now await my first virus..

Rik · Dec 08, 2007, 13:15:15

Quote from: Inactive on Dec 08, 2007, 13:13:21
I am a tite buttocks

Are you going to post photographic evidence of that, In?

Inactive · Dec 08, 2007, 13:19:11

Quote from: Rik on Dec 08, 2007, 13:15:15
Are you going to post photographic evidence of that, In?

You really don't want to go there Rik, anyway have a 21st ( thousand ) Karma for your cheek, or my cheek.(s).

Rik · Dec 08, 2007, 13:21:28

Thanks, In.

Simon · Dec 08, 2007, 13:23:22

Quote from: Inactive on Dec 08, 2007, 13:13:21
I do use the internet somewhat wisely, as I am sure you do Simon, so I consider my system quite safe.

Yes, and that's half the battle won, In.

QuoteI now await my first virus..

On it's way!

mrapoc · Dec 09, 2007, 15:32:18

I think its all a big conspiracy to some extent

Why spends hours at home building a virus, send it to people you don't know when you can't even see their face as their data goes down the drain?

These antivirus companies just happen to get these virus definitions before the virus is spread to enough extent? Perhaps they pay to have the virus sent to them first for analysis? Or perhaps they build the virus themselves?

I dont trust much

Rik · Dec 09, 2007, 15:37:45

You're displaying a terrible cynicism, Sam. Careful or Steve will think you're one of us old codgers.

Inactive · Dec 09, 2007, 15:46:33

I have to say, there may well be some truth in Sam's post.

Rik · Dec 09, 2007, 15:54:12

Unfortunately, we can only find out for sure by taking risks that are unacceptable - at least to me.

Gary · Dec 09, 2007, 16:01:10

I agree there may be some truth in Sams statement, I mean in the 70's there were those awful wall units that were just a bunch of boxes you put your tv in and everything else you wanted on dispay, now there was no public demand for them, demand was created, possibly the same with malware, but also organised crime makes a lot of cash out of it, so I think its a dangerous area to tread, and like Rik, its an area of unacceptable risk for me, a bit like not starting on Australasia when actually playing Risk

Ann · Dec 09, 2007, 16:09:49

I think these guys write programs and hand them out free simply because they are geeks who enjoy seeing their work in the public domain being useful. I use Spybot S & D and it's very good. I give a donation every now and then too.

Simon · Dec 09, 2007, 20:45:17

Quote from: mrapoc on Dec 09, 2007, 15:32:18These antivirus companies just happen to get these virus definitions before the virus is spread to enough extent? Perhaps they pay to have the virus sent to them first for analysis? Or perhaps they build the virus themselves?

As has been said, I also believe there to be some truth in the suggestion that security software vendors create viruses (or maybe just Chinese whispers of viruses) in order to make people feel compelled to buy their products. Indeed, I think it's fairly well documented that some anti-spyware programs actually use trial versions, or 'free scans' to plant malware on your PC then demand payment for the full version to remove it!

That said, it's a bit like home or car insurance. You hope to never need to use it, but you feel more secure having it.