Kommentare
-
Spoken to a colleague of mine involved, and I am told the issue has been fixed and will go into the next update, which is, as I know, released this week.
-
Looks like a known issue KB2267602 continually wanting to update I asked a colleague to reproduce the issue (I am vacationing until 01/2025).
-
Got it. We'll continue from here.
-
So it is a SCSI and not USB (or not directly the storage device, it might still have another associated device in an USB class). We will try to reproduce with the settings you presented and with a device as close as possible to the DELL H830. Thank you for feedback. (I will be OOO until January, but a colleague of mine…
-
The feature is is discussion phase. Not sure when this will result in a concrete implementation, though. Keep stressing :)
-
Also, can you detail a little (or perhaps a little more) about your particular setup? The "mechanical drive array" of 40TB jumps into our attention; maybe this is a particular piece of hardware that might be seen as an USB for some reason. Can you share - and please be as detailed as possible - about the device? Let's say…
-
I don't know the inner plans on SecurePass, but I remember there is something like that on the list. Let me ask the guys taking care of SecurePass and get back.
-
I don't know this specific area, but I just dropped an email to the team. Let's see if there is a pending, known issue on this.
-
A revert to a previous update will mean even more changes. Just to say from memory - the version comparison will be confused, driver downgrades should occur etc. And this is from me, which I am not on the update team, so I only can speculate on the outer side of the potential problems. There is only one place where this is…
-
At this time just to confirm me (or not) if these are the steps: installed/updated the product a vulnerability scan (manual? automatic?) was executed and generated a Media autorun is enabled notification event in Notifications disabled Autoplay from Windows > Settings was there another manual vulnerability scan executed?…
-
Noted. I proposed this custom filtering type of hosts scan to the team and management. I am not sure at this time when and how it will be done, but now that I started, I will continue pushing to implement this.
-
Although it looks straightforward on the user interface, the changes on the backend will be complex. Needless to say, the update is a critical component and all changes inside it are treated with extreme care. Will have to see how team and management feels about this.
-
You might hit a some sort of bug, although I am unable to reproduce it yet. We have an issue filed for now and we will continue hunting it, although I tried various scenarios and I am yet unable to repro. I will probably need some more details as the investigation continues, if that is ok for you.
-
A note. The "Scan host file"-option is useless as it is today for advanced users, and also misleading in the description, as it reads "Checks the file that maps hostnames to IP addresses to prevent DNS hijack attacks", where a more appropriate description would read "Prevents any alteration to the file that maps hostnames…
-
It makes sense. How would one define such a template? IPv4/IPv6/domain based, such as a some form of a list 192.168.1.1 acme.com *.acme.org ?
-
I cannot reproduce the issue. The Media Auto Run is turning on automatically It is off in Control Panel>Autoplay or Windows Settings>Devices>Autoplay? Or it is the event that appears in the Bitdefender Notifications? Disabling it does not work more than few days , why? How did you disabled it? Directly from the Settings or…
-
We will investigate the above scenarios. As I said, I don't know much about this area, so my colleagues taking care of this will check and get back.
-
Then I suppose I got this backwards. As I said, I do not know the code in this area. Let me forward this to someone knowing more than me.
-
This is probably by design, although I don't know the code - when realtime is disabled the user is asked, when enabled it is automatically handled (probably if the Scan flash drives option is set to Autoscan).
-
@Kedar I see absolutely no logic in not having a virtual printer connection Security reasons, as I explained. A rogue virtual printer can easily intercept private data and send them to undesired locations. Also, many of them do not run correctly in a separate desktop. But I am open to allow them based on an opt-in. The…
-
This will probably will make it into the next (major) user interface update. Not sure how much will be more invested in the current UI.
-
Looks reasonable to me. Sent an email to the guys to hear their feedback.
-
Looks interesting. Just dropped an email to see what the guys are saying about this.
-
(No problem for tagging, that's a way to make me alerted). Just filed an issue based on your findings. This will go to another team (meaning not directly the one I am in) but now it is assigned and it will be prioritised. I cannot offer a time frame now, but I will keep asking (either they will solve it, or get tired from…
-
From past experiences, I have encountered printer drivers displaying modal (i.e. blocking) dialogs to user, and displaying them in the default desktop (not in the secure desktop), therefore blocking the user interface. I can think on no other obvious cause I have previously encounter at this time. Log files are always of…
-
I'm not involved in macOS, but I dropped a mail to someone who knows more than me. As I will get an update I'll get back to you (unless someone else will move quicker).
-
I don't have any news so far. The team is still trying to reproduce the issue in order to be able to deliver a possible fix.
-
Although I am not involved in the scan and I frankly don't know what options are used, I suppose an improvement could be something like this: add a secondary option, such as "Custom scan…", which should appear when the Shift key is pressed (this is the usual key for contextual menu to press in order to display…
-
I'm glad that worked out. It might have been the print spooler either with a queue too full, or in an inconsistent (or stopped) state. Anyways, feel free to stress me any time if something is not right. Thank you for your patience and feedback.
-
Yes, there is a policy implemented by many banks to reject (or at least display a warning) when a browser is more than 2 versions older than the currently released (currently Chrome is 130, and market Safepay is based on 127, although we are releasing soon Safepay based on 130). I'm not saying this is the cause, there…
