I wonder why RecognizerCryptolocker is not installed and wont download when performing an update (even with beta server in proxy and host settings). Is this intended?
Chrome running sandboxed has a tendency to crash after a while.
Same here.
Do you have only the beta server enabled or do you have both the beta server and the regular download server enabled?
Hi Recognizers are not updated yet on Beta server.
It will be done in next hrs and i will inform.
Thanks
-umesh
Lets create a new wishlist and put for vote in light of newly introduced improvement.
Earlier, it was quite reasonable to expect not to exclude an app from a component it has not been blocked to begin with. So this change in Beta addressed that.
Lets understand now use cases where a given application is blocked by two components and you would like to unblock from one of the two.
Can we find real use cases?
Sent that feedback to BuketB when unblock applications was new (since the description dident fit how it worked)
Mohan wanted more control, so i linked the suggestion i made and how it could look like if he wanted to make a wish for it.
forgot to finnish my original sentence to him/her so i edited it. 
I updated Win 10 Insider from 15299 to 15299.15 and the beta runs successfully as far as first impressions go.
Edit. Seems to be working on Win 7 x64 as well. When in Virtual Desktop it only has the virtualised regular desktop and misses the Google Apps interface. I have Dragon and Silverlight installed.
Referring to
[at]Umesh - I had already raised Wish much earlier with a more detailed screengrab than [at]BlueTesta had provided.
You’ve commented on it
If I create a new wish topic I think it would create a duplication
Correct
The screen grab on this existing Wish already shows the situation as it exists today i.e. 2 components (HIPS & Firewall) blocked the executable in this case instup.exe which behaves as an installer (Avast updates component).
Now if we use Improved_Unblock_Applications_Interface.png it will add Allow rules in both the HIPS and Firewall component.
So having the choice of component allows me to add the rule for HIPS but allows me to skip the rule for Firewall or set to Ask. Otherwise with the current implementation I’ve to go into Firewall settings and remove the Allow rule. Because I don’t want to give access to the installer permanent Allow access to the internet but I want to allow the executable to install always.
Example of other executable’s from my “Blocked Applications” list
C:\Program Files (x86)\ImgBurn\ImgBurn.exe (Firewall, HIPS)
C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\Office14\Excel.exe (Firewall, HIPS)
C:\Program Files\Avidemux\Avidemux.exe (Firewall, HIPS)
Others like Intel graphics batch files are (Containment, HIPS) etc.
Hope this helps
Edited to add a screengrab of Blocked Applications
Cheers
Hi Mohan,
What were your CIS settings when you ended up in these cases?
Thanks
-umesh
Hi Umesh,
CIS : 10.0.1.6294
Antivirus Database : 27703
Recognizer : 10.0.1.6294
Modules
Enabled
HIPS - Paranoid
Auto-Containment [Though I’ve turned it off recently as I’m not installing new stuff nowadays]
Firewall - Custom
Virusscope - Enabled, Also checked Monitor only applications in the container
Disabled
AntiVirus
File rating - Disabled cloud lookup, Do not trust either vendors / trusted installers
Website filtering
Also Comodo could consider the change to the context menu as below
- Select & Unblock component(s) shown in ‘Blocked by’ column ← New
- Unblock for all component(s) shown in ‘Blocked by’ column ← Wording slightly modified
- Unblock for all security component(s) ← component(s) instead of components
P.s. You should really implement Wish or similar would make creating and pasting this information much easier
Cheers
Mohan
You see, you are an advanced user, who is ready to attend to every HIPS alert, while “Unblock Applications” is designed for ordinary users using default settings to go to that interface and quickly see all blocked applications and unblock desired application.
There is no end to granularity you can think in “Unblock Applications” and if you do that, you kill the simplicity of it for which it is designed for.
There was a fundamental discrepancy in that to unblock from all components, beyond that, it’s really doing what it is intended for.
As advanced user, it is suggested to tweak rules in respective sections as even within HIPS, you may allow one action but block other action and seek Ask for another.
So for now, we would leave it here and may come back in future if there are more users still pressing for it.
So i would suggest to create a new wish list as old one is really obsolete with voting on that was based on major discrepancy and we go from there.
have you guys noticed the bash on windows issue when enhanced protection mode turned on
“Unblock” in the form as is - is a harmful and dangerous function and unusable in most cases. Partial unblocking works only with specific settings, in the completely unblock there is an explicit redundancy of the permissions. It’s not for ordinary users.
I don’t know what you mean. Could you explain?
bash on windows stucks when enhanced protection mode turned on
Hi Qweaszxcdf,
Please add bash under exclusions in Advanced Protection → Miscellaneous-> Detect shellcode injections.
Kind Regards,
PremJK
there is nothing to do with detect shellcode injection
When I was using EBay today, Secure Shopping still didn’t notify me to switch over to Secure Shopping. Please get this fixed for the official release please.