When I click on the "w" icon in the taskbar and open the interface it states "protection disabled (subscr1ption expired)" . The icon and interface though is still green. The realtime , webshiled and firewall are all off.
My subscription expired just yesterday. apart from possibly two emails (the most recent a month ago) I did not receive any other indications/warnings - has my protection been switched off without a warning so quickly?
Page 1 / 1
Hi Rocky
Do I understand you correctly that you received a warning email a month ago and took no action? If that is the case then that is normal...there is a 30 day grace period from date of expiration of the subscription to the time that WSA will cease protecting you...that 30 days is to allow one to resolve the issue, i.e, eithre renew or find alternative protection.
In terms of warnings WSA should have been broadcastinga warning both in the main app panel and also via the notification tray icon (in fact I have lost count of the number of 'complaints' we get in relation to what are seen by some as WSA's overzealous warnings, etc).
The recommended course of action would be to either renew, purchase a new subscription (requiring entry of a new keycode) or a change to another security app...eitherway you need to do something sooner rather than later so that you are not unprotected.
Regards, Baldrick
Do I understand you correctly that you received a warning email a month ago and took no action? If that is the case then that is normal...there is a 30 day grace period from date of expiration of the subscription to the time that WSA will cease protecting you...that 30 days is to allow one to resolve the issue, i.e, eithre renew or find alternative protection.
In terms of warnings WSA should have been broadcastinga warning both in the main app panel and also via the notification tray icon (in fact I have lost count of the number of 'complaints' we get in relation to what are seen by some as WSA's overzealous warnings, etc).
The recommended course of action would be to either renew, purchase a new subscription (requiring entry of a new keycode) or a change to another security app...eitherway you need to do something sooner rather than later so that you are not unprotected.
Regards, Baldrick
Hi Baldrick,
Sorry I've just noticed your reply. Not sure how my post got to here - I posted in the business forum as it is the business version we are using (5 seats) - also for some reason the post is not appearing on my panel ?
Yes I did receive an email and left off action until the renewal which was 5th November . On 6th or 7th I went to check and there were no warnings being thrown up but when I opened the main app ( on the one PC which was set in the web management console as unmanaged) the shields were all showing as off I.e a day or two after renewal date not 30 days later. It was the abruptness of this cutoff that caused me to reconsider whether or not to renew.
At the minute I am still undecided and am trialling ESet.
Sorry I've just noticed your reply. Not sure how my post got to here - I posted in the business forum as it is the business version we are using (5 seats) - also for some reason the post is not appearing on my panel ?
Yes I did receive an email and left off action until the renewal which was 5th November . On 6th or 7th I went to check and there were no warnings being thrown up but when I opened the main app ( on the one PC which was set in the web management console as unmanaged) the shields were all showing as off I.e a day or two after renewal date not 30 days later. It was the abruptness of this cutoff that caused me to reconsider whether or not to renew.
At the minute I am still undecided and am trialling ESet.
Hi Rocky
No worries...perhaps on of our members who are Business Ambassadors ?, ? could offer some advice on this one and the 'abruptness' of the expiry, etc.?
Regards, Baldrick
No worries...perhaps on of our members who are Business Ambassadors ?, ? could offer some advice on this one and the 'abruptness' of the expiry, etc.?
Regards, Baldrick
Hello ?,
Welcome to the Webroot Community,
? I cannot explain this abruptness..
My suggestion would be to submit a Support ticket on the Businness end by going here.https://www.webrootanywhere.com/servicewelcome.asp?source=ENTERPRISEWSA
Or maybe ? or ? could advise here as well.
I've always believed there was a 30 day grace period.
Welcome to the Webroot Community,
? I cannot explain this abruptness..
My suggestion would be to submit a Support ticket on the Businness end by going here.https://www.webrootanywhere.com/servicewelcome.asp?source=ENTERPRISEWSA
Or maybe ? or ? could advise here as well.
I've always believed there was a 30 day grace period.
Hi Sherry
Many thanks for the pickup and for the assist.
Regards, Baldrick
Many thanks for the pickup and for the assist.
Regards, Baldrick
Sure Thing ?,
I just feel bad that this has caused an inconvience in this situation. Hopefully this can be resolved and that ? will decide to stay with Webroot?
I just feel bad that this has caused an inconvience in this situation. Hopefully this can be resolved and that ? will decide to stay with Webroot?
I also am not able to shed any light here. The impression I had is the same 30 day grace period, though I admit I have not specifically asked about the Endpoint behavior on this.
Hi all ,
Thanks for your input. I want to like Webroot ( have used it for over two years) but I am beginning to see it more as an application control software than as AV per se. Essentially it looks at applications/processes as they start and then
I am still vacillating as to whether to renew - the one thing that prompts me to stay is that the resource usage is very light.
Thanks for your input. I want to like Webroot ( have used it for over two years) but I am beginning to see it more as an application control software than as AV per se. Essentially it looks at applications/processes as they start and then
- blocks them if they are known bad
- monitors then if they are unknown ( at least until they are identified or an over-ride is put in place) so as to be able to rollback if damage is caused
- otherwise allows them to run.
I am still vacillating as to whether to renew - the one thing that prompts me to stay is that the resource usage is very light.
Hi Rocky
I would have to very much disagree with your view that WSA is more application control software than anti-malware, and apart from its monitoring capabilities what you ahev described would apply to almost all anti malware software.
It is 'set & forget' if yo do not go into the options and play (something similar can be done with just about every AV/IS that I have ever used/evaluated...the more granular options are for those persons who have (or believe they have) the capabilities to adjust & tweak the protection that the set & forget /default settings provide.
No one forces the user to go behind the scenes and change a monitored file to Block or Allow...that is at the users's discretion.
As to being 'uneasy' re. allowing malware to sit on a PC until it activates...I just cannot see why...it is inactive and will be jumped on the moment it activates, so apart from taking up some disk space what harm is it doing...better IMHO to focus on what is active as soon as it is active so that it cannot damage ones system rather then expend resources on digging out something that may never amount to much.
I am not trying to convince you to renew but hope you will.
Regards, Baldrick
I would have to very much disagree with your view that WSA is more application control software than anti-malware, and apart from its monitoring capabilities what you ahev described would apply to almost all anti malware software.
It is 'set & forget' if yo do not go into the options and play (something similar can be done with just about every AV/IS that I have ever used/evaluated...the more granular options are for those persons who have (or believe they have) the capabilities to adjust & tweak the protection that the set & forget /default settings provide.
No one forces the user to go behind the scenes and change a monitored file to Block or Allow...that is at the users's discretion.
As to being 'uneasy' re. allowing malware to sit on a PC until it activates...I just cannot see why...it is inactive and will be jumped on the moment it activates, so apart from taking up some disk space what harm is it doing...better IMHO to focus on what is active as soon as it is active so that it cannot damage ones system rather then expend resources on digging out something that may never amount to much.
I am not trying to convince you to renew but hope you will.
Regards, Baldrick
......................................................................................................................................................................................................@ wrote:
Hi Rocky
.....No one forces the user to go behind the scenes and change a monitored file to Block or Allow...that is at the users's discretion........
As to being 'uneasy' re. allowing malware to sit on a PC until it activates...I just cannot see why...it is inactive and will be jumped on the moment it activates, so apart from taking up some disk space what harm is it doing.
Hi Baldrick
Im not entirely convinced that it will not often be necessary to intervene to prevent the monitoring file becoming large / impacting performance.
Regarding inactive malware - reasonable point but "prevention is better than cure" e.g. Email carrying a payload. [Edit ] thanks to
Rocky
Hello Rocky,@ wrote:
......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Hi Baldrick
Im not entirely convinced that it will not often be necessary to intervene to prevent the monitoring file becoming large / impacting performance.
Regarding inactive malware - reasonable point but "prevention is better than cure" e.g. Email carrying a payload. [Edit ] thanks to@ for his link (in another thread ) to an interesting discussion about Webroots scan philosophy https://community.webroot.com/t5/Webroot-SecureAnywhere-Antivirus/Scanning-PC-suspiciously-fast/m-p/6636 . I suppose this issue (inactive malware) is a question of personal preference. All I can say is whilst trialling another AV it has already quarantined email attachments carrying malicious content - Webroot woudl of course jump on this if the attachement was opened but psychologically (IMHO) it feels more "comfortable" that the payload has been neutralised already
Rocky
WSA doesn't scan emails but if someone clicked on a bad attachment then WSA's Realtime Shield will jump in, that's how WSA uses very little resources and the new way AV's should be going I'm not saying ESET is bad as it's not I was a long time user but got fed up with the bloat and was using NOD32 with Prevx then in time found out I didn't need NOD32 and just used Prevx and then Webroot Aquired Prevx in Nov 2010 and made it much better and continue to do so.
Thanks,
Daniel ;)
Hi Rocky
I won't debate you on these points as it is very much a case of 'each to their own'...all I will say is that in the number of years that I have been running WSA I have never been infected by malware and on occassion when there was a possible attempt WSA jumped in immediately and neutrlised the potential miscreant...stoppiing it dead!
I also take the view that if it is dormant it cannot hurt you so it is akin to having a text file on disk that one never opens...it is there but not used. But again it is a matter of personal choice (or some might uncharitably say personal paranoia) as to what one's view is on that point.
I have used a number of the competion over the years and yes, if one gets a cosy feeling by seeing them tot up the numbers in terms of what has been found/neutralise then WSA is definitively not for you...but as Daniel says one will not find a lighter, better performing security app than WSA.
But in the final analysis the decision as to what you use for system protection is for each of us to make.
Regards, Baldrick
I won't debate you on these points as it is very much a case of 'each to their own'...all I will say is that in the number of years that I have been running WSA I have never been infected by malware and on occassion when there was a possible attempt WSA jumped in immediately and neutrlised the potential miscreant...stoppiing it dead!
I also take the view that if it is dormant it cannot hurt you so it is akin to having a text file on disk that one never opens...it is there but not used. But again it is a matter of personal choice (or some might uncharitably say personal paranoia) as to what one's view is on that point.
I have used a number of the competion over the years and yes, if one gets a cosy feeling by seeing them tot up the numbers in terms of what has been found/neutralise then WSA is definitively not for you...but as Daniel says one will not find a lighter, better performing security app than WSA.
But in the final analysis the decision as to what you use for system protection is for each of us to make.
Regards, Baldrick
? After Clean install of WSA see what it says!
Thanks,
Daniel ;)
Thanks,
Daniel ;)
? ? Full marks guys for effort and commitment ! :D
Rocky
Rocky
Hi Guys,
Making a decision in the next couple of days. One question you can maybe help with ?
I found over the last two years that I had to generate over-rides on a number of accasions for some of the software on our PC's ( sometimes due to new updates). I dislike doing so as it seems to me to somewhat defeat the purpose of an AV (ie over-rides weaken overall security). How quickly would Webroot pick up on monitored applications or does it require a certain base level of Webroot seeing this application before an application would be whitelisted by Webroot as opposed to me whitelisting ?
For example a recent scan log shows I still have unrecognised software on one PC including sumatra PDF - I would have though Sumatra was a common enough application for Webroot to have automatically marked it as good ?
Making a decision in the next couple of days. One question you can maybe help with ?
I found over the last two years that I had to generate over-rides on a number of accasions for some of the software on our PC's ( sometimes due to new updates). I dislike doing so as it seems to me to somewhat defeat the purpose of an AV (ie over-rides weaken overall security). How quickly would Webroot pick up on monitored applications or does it require a certain base level of Webroot seeing this application before an application would be whitelisted by Webroot as opposed to me whitelisting ?
For example a recent scan log shows I still have unrecognised software on one PC including sumatra PDF - I would have though Sumatra was a common enough application for Webroot to have automatically marked it as good ?
Hello there,
I think the best way to get those questions answered would be to submit a Trouble Ticket to have a conversation with Support regarding this. Most of what we can give here on the Community in regards to that is educated guesses at best, as we have discussed it several times in the past.
I think the best way to get those questions answered would be to submit a Trouble Ticket to have a conversation with Support regarding this. Most of what we can give here on the Community in regards to that is educated guesses at best, as we have discussed it several times in the past.
So - finally decided to stay with Webroot even if there are some things I am not 100% convinced about - other options all seemed heavier on PC. Some great information by KitP over at spiceworks helped with the decision https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/1326526
Hi Rocky@ wrote:
Hi Guys,
Making a decision in the next couple of days. One question you can maybe help with ?
I found over the last two years that I had to generate over-rides on a number of occasions for some of the software on our PC's ( sometimes due to new updates). I dislike doing so as it seems to me to somewhat defeat the purpose of an AV (ie over-rides weaken overall security). How quickly would Webroot pick up on monitored applications or does it require a certain base level of Webroot seeing this application before an application would be whitelisted by Webroot as opposed to me whitelisting ?
For example a recent scan log shows I still have unrecognised software on one PC including sumatra PDF - I would have though Sumatra was a common enough application for Webroot to have automatically marked it as good ?
I am a little surprised to hear that one of your PCs is regarding Sumatra as unrecognised. I installed SumatraPDF in July and I have just checked my logs to confirm that it never monitored it and treated it as 'good' from the start.
However it does monitor several quite well known programs and even if they have been whitelisted, it will monitor them again following an update. Webroot is currently monitoring Shadow Defender following an update to the latest version a few days ago.
I think you made a good decision in sticking with Webroot and I found your Webroot v Cylance link very enlightening.
Regards
Nemo
Hi ?,
Like ?, I too found the Webroot vs Cylance thread very interesting. Thanks for posting. :)
bd
p.s. I DO wonder why ?'s avatar looks like Gallagher in that thread though. :D
Like ?, I too found the Webroot vs Cylance thread very interesting. Thanks for posting. :)
bd
p.s. I DO wonder why ?'s avatar looks like Gallagher in that thread though. :D
That's great to hear! Also thanks for the interesting Topic from Spiceworks and Kit's expertize was/is always appreciated here!@ wrote:
So - finally decided to stay with Webroot even if there are some things I am not 100% convinced about - other options all seemed heavier on PC. Some great information by KitP over at spiceworks helped with the decision https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/1326526
Thanks,
Daniel 😉
Reply
Login to the community
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.