6 days into 15 day trial Cyberhawk Pro 2.0.4 alerts me Nod32 wants to log keystrokes. I told CyberHawk to allow Nod32 to log keystrokes. Was that the right choice?
After using Nod32 through the entire trial period of, I believe, 40 days I am now running the full(purchased) Nod32 2.70.39 version with virus signature database 2426 (20070727). However, I just configured Nod32 to Blackspears specifications( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=37509 ) about 5 days ago. After configuring it to Blackspears specs the only change I really noticed is that Nod32 now takes about 1hour 10minutes to on-demand scan as opposed to the 17minutes or so before the reconfiguration. This is the first time that Cyberhawk has told me Nod32 wants to log keystrokes. I allowed it.
6 days into 15 day trial Cyberhawk Pro 2.0.4 alerts me Nod32 wants to log keystrokes. I told CyberHawk to allow Nod32 to log keystrokes. Was that the right choice?
Eset NOD32 is an anti virus program, not a keylogger. I am not familiar with Cyberhawk, but it sounds like it's giving a false positive.
An ESET Customer Care Representative has updated this case with the following information:
Hello, We do not have any code that logs keystrokes; in fact our new version 2.7.xx was introduced to prevent these types of tools.
We do not recommend running any other AV, Anti-malware, Anti-adware programs in conjunction with NOD32. Using two AV type scanners will eventually lead to file system corruption and eventual system failure.
Please contact that vendor for a solution.
Thank you I very much appreciate ESET's advice and I hold them in very high regard, but I still wanted to clarify my "reasoning" to them even if I am only an average XP sp2 user. Following is the text of my reply to ESET:
The program that I mentioned is, to my understanding, a HIPS, or behavior analyzing type program. To my understanding HIPS fits within a category of security applications that has been developed to run simultaneously with conventional AV, etc. They do not rely upon "signatures" to stop viruses, etc. I am feeling somewhat "conflicted" now because, based solely upon my own "research", I do feel that these types of security applications are an important and necessary component of a comprehensive and "layered" approach to computer security.
I really need to consider this subject more because HIPS, or behavior analyzing security applications, are very well known to a certain category of computer users and, from what I can discern, are "deployed" on windows XP machines simultaneously with conventional AV and antispyware and antimalware products. I "consulted" user forums like "wilderssecurity, where it is my understanding that ESET maintins an OFFICIAL Support Forum( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=15 ) , castlecops.com, geekstogo.com, and tomcoyote.org during my "research" into additional security measures that I can/should take in addition to conventional firewall, antivirus, antispyware, etc. Wilderssecurity.com has significant threads supporting the use of HIPS, or behavior analyzing type security applications, simultaneously with Nod32.
Possibly to my credit I had already developed a very high opinion of Nod32 after doing the same kind of research that led to my conclusion(s) about the use of HIPS, or behavior analyzing security applications. I ALLOWED the so called key logging, as reported by Cyberhawk Pro(HIPS), because I valued the integrity of ESET far more than that of the Cyberhawk Pro trial program. I just was not willing to believe that Nod32 on a new install of XP sp2 was specifically doing something bad nor did I believe the new XP install had been "infected" by something aggressive or effective enough to "masquerade" as or manipulate Nod32.
Researching on some of the forums that I mentioned I am told that this "false positive" is a known issue to Cyberhawk's makers; however, I am unclear of when or if the "fix" will be deployed. Again, I told it to ALLOW Nod32 though.
I used the trial version of Nod32 in just the same way before I bought the full version.
My question now is: Does running anything more than Nod32 and a firewall(Comodo in my case) on my XP sp2 machine "eventually lead to file system corruption and eventual system failure" like ESET stated in the email or was this possibly just a "quick" answer by an ESET representative who may not necessarily be familiar with the purported importance of and the real popularity of HIPS and other behavior analyzing software?
Hi 072707,
As has been pointed out in the forum you linked,…
"You have already demonstrated that you are not an ordinary user."
I'm sure that statement was made because you have demonstrated that you ask intelligent questions and do your homework in investigating the answers. <– That's a good thing.
You have been given information about recommended security utilities to use for your security-baseline.
The folks who have offered that information may be volunteers, but they are professional level in their knowledge and experience.
They run their own machines according to the recommendations that they give to others.
It's working for them.
It would most likely work for you.
Those of us in the online help industry rely upon our machines and our security-baseline utilities to assist our safety, but realize that our own good decision-making is the primary tool in security baseline at all times.
Good decision-making needs to be a part of every online computer user's armor.
You have good basic security for your machine.
That doesn't mean that your machine is invulnerable to infection in every possible conceivable situation, but it does mean that your machine is fairly secure.
Your own good judgment is the important element to add to your security-baseline.
Good judgment is required in machine setup and selection of utilities.
There certainly are "good" security features that "can" be added to the basics.
But in some cases, the added utilities may conflict or create false positives.
It's up to you to do the investigation.
If you add a utility and have done no other online browsing or downloading, and the addition creates an alert, it is possible that the new utility has created a conflict or is detecting one of the other security utility's data base. It's also possible the the newly added utility has faults of its own.
Role up your sleeves, you've got some investigation to be doing.
_________–
As for me, I use competent basics and am not likely to add any of the extras that you have selected, at least until I've researched them more thoroughly or until they become widely recommended by reputable experts.
Best Regards
✨ Ask AI
AI can make mistakes. Check the cited posts. Archived advice can be out-of-date
Don't include personal information. Questions and selected public posts go to OpenAI. About Ask AI
You have been given information about recommended security utilities to use for your security-baseline.
The folks who have offered that information may be volunteers, but they are professional level in their knowledge and experience.
They run their own machines according to the recommendations that they give to others.
It's working for them.
It would most likely work for you.
Those of us in the online help industry rely upon our machines and our security-baseline utilities to assist our safety, but realize that our own good decision-making is the primary tool in security baseline at all times.
Good decision-making needs to be a part of every online computer user's armor.
You have good basic security for your machine.
That doesn't mean that your machine is invulnerable to infection in every possible conceivable situation, but it does mean that your machine is fairly secure.
Your own good judgment is the important element to add to your security-baseline.
Good judgment is required in machine setup and selection of utilities.
There certainly are "good" security features that "can" be added to the basics.
But in some cases, the added utilities may conflict or create false positives.
It's up to you to do the investigation.
If you add a utility and have done no other online browsing or downloading, and the addition creates an alert, it is possible that the new utility has created a conflict or is detecting one of the other security utility's data base. It's also possible the the newly added utility has faults of its own.
Role up your sleeves, you've got some investigation to be doing.
_________–
As for me, I use competent basics and am not likely to add any of the extras that you have selected, at least until I've researched them more thoroughly or until they become widely recommended by reputable experts.
Best Regards