A Perect Addition To avast!

system · 2006-12-18T23:21:37.000Z

Some of you might be familiar with this program, while most of you are probably not. This program is designed to be used along side your current antivirus protection, is light on system resources and runs silently like a hidden assassin in the background.

I’m talking about Cyberhawk. Oh and did I mention it is FREE! No strings attached, no limitations and no nag screens to purchase it!

What makes Cyberhawk different is that is does not rely on signatures but rather what is called behavior-based protection technology. Cyberhawk is suppose to protect against zero-day attacks. The jury is still out on this one but none the less I was pretty impressed with an independent AV-Comparative Test I saw that included Cyberhawk and other behavior-based protection products. It significantly out performed another more well known product of this type called Prev-x which personally I still don’t like very much. But anyways it’s freely available at http://www.novatix.com/ Cheers. Enjoy! ;D

Lisandro · 2006-12-19T00:52:33.000Z

Want more HIPS products?
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=24924.msg204074#msg204074

system · 2006-12-19T01:31:51.000Z

FWIW, I tried CyberHawk a few weeks ago and finally wound up uninstalling it. The problem encountered was a general slowdown of computing functions and some system instabilities (windows explorer would hang).

I am now evaluating SpywareTerminator, so far so good.

http://www.spywareterminator.com/

Mac · 2006-12-19T03:58:39.000Z

I would like to know where they get their info on AV products. look at that chart on their homepage and see that it says Mcafee is good and TrendMicro is bottom of the barrel

system · 2006-12-19T05:21:25.000Z

Thanks Tech for that thread link. I didn’t know so many HIPS programs existed.

system · 2006-12-19T05:31:28.000Z

.: Mac :. post:4:

I would like to know where they get their info on AV products. look at that chart on their homepage and see that it says Mcafee is good and TrendMicro is bottom of the barrel

This shouldn’t surprise you. Trend Micro’s detection rate is awful. In the past I’ve read some not to impressive performance issues with TM. A more recent article is here: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2023127,00.asp

Pay close attention to the chart and TM comes in at #18. Not Impressive at all. But like I already said this isn’t the first time TM has demonstrated a poor detection rate. avast! on the other hand comes in at #11 which is much better.

The only real issue I’ve ever had with McAfee is that it is a system resource hog like Norton and the software at times can be quite buggy and unstable but otherwise a very dependable detection rate which has been demonstrated in numerous test.

But whatever your opinion is, it doesn’t hurt to add Cyberhawk to the equation.

system · 2006-12-19T15:28:45.000Z

Hi all :

 Some on the bleepingcomputer forums had unfavorable comments about "Cyberhawk"
 and recommended "alternatives" .

system · 2006-12-19T22:03:06.000Z

Spiritsongs post:7:

Hi all :

 Some on the bleepingcomputer forums had unfavorable comments about "Cyberhawk"
 and recommended "alternatives" .

Okay. So who are they recommending? Maybe a link to the thread would be good.

system · 2006-12-19T22:45:25.000Z

RejZoR has some optimistic words for Cyberhawk on fileforum.com

http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/Cyberhawk/1138656773/1

I wonder if he can update us??

Lisandro · 2006-12-20T00:32:54.000Z

Spiritsongs post:7:

Some on the bleepingcomputer forums had unfavorable comments about “Cyberhawk” and recommended “alternatives” .

Which ones?
This was a softare that I was tempted to use… but I never install ;D
The issues with SSM were enough to me… too much protection and security… I want to live at least some moments in front of the computer ;D

BJ_GeOrgE · 2006-12-23T00:06:48.000Z

internetworld7 post:6:

This shouldn’t surprise you. Trend Micro’s detection rate is awful.
Pay close attention to the chart and TM comes in at #18. Not Impressive at all. But like I already said this isn’t the first time TM has demonstrated a poor detection rate. avast! on the other hand comes in at #11 which is much better.
But whatever your opinion is, it doesn’t hurt to add Cyberhawk to the equation.

then u don’t know TM well…coz i’ve tried both Pc-cillin internet security 2006 and 2007 and they rock!!!they have one of the best detection rates…the only bad is that they use a lot of system resources(128-256mb ram)…i still recommend this product…so don’t say that TM has bad detection rates if u have not even tried it…check this link http://anti-virus-software-review.toptenreviews.com/?ttreng=1&ttrkey=antivirus i don’t know how trustful the site is but i’ve tried the most toprated AV programs of this site and i’m very satisfied…

RejZoR · 2006-12-23T07:26:20.000Z

Yes, Cyberhawk is worth using. It’s free and whats probably most important install and forget. Other such tools will have loads of settings, even more popups and questions. Not with Cyberhawk. It’ll only warn you when necessary.
Protection is also one of the main reasons. When i brieafly teste it with malware it detected like 95% of ALL new malware that i’ve thrown at it. Thats malware that was not even detected by any antivirus or just by some using heuristics.
Oh and it was able to stop Polipos virus even before it could actually infect anything. Yep, you heard it right, behavior blocker stopped file infector (the real virus). So yeah, it’s an excellent suppliment for ANY antivirus and also works wonderful with avast!. If you don’t mind some really minor delay because of behavior analysis when running certain programs it’s really worth it.

system · 2006-12-23T08:02:34.000Z

RejZor - is Cyberhawk a reasonable replacement for a HIPS program like Prevx or Spyware Terminator?

Announcements