Prevx then Webroot/Prevx used to use as one of its major marketing features that the product was compatible with and could be used along side most any other A/V product.
As the years have passed since Prevx became part of Webroot and WSA has matured into an established stand-alone-anti-malware solution, I see very little mention of compatabilty in marketing the product.You have to look hard to find it and Webroot used to have a listing of known compatable products on its's website.
Is this just a marketing strategy based upon WSA having been developed into a mature "Top-Shelf" stand-alone-product or is there something that has been done to the program somewhere along its development timeline that has made it less compatible with other products? Is it now more likely to slow down your PC or web browsing if used as a companion product?
I hear differing views over at Wilders. Many still use it as a companion product, but more and more posters are using it as their sole anti-malware solution.
Page 1 / 2
I have found it to be compaitible with Malwarebytes Anti-Malware that I run along side of WR complete.... WB does not however run very well if at all with other AV programs.
There has been NO change in the compatibility for which Prevx and now Webroot is known for. At this time, it would appear that the marketing strategy is simply to point out the fact that this is not the Webroot of the past. Back in 2008, for example, it was not meant as a standalone product. Webroot is, I think, working to change public perception that was formed in prior years before it was a standalone product.
As for TexPhil... I really do not understand just what you mean. With changing from mentioning "WR" to "WB", as well as the claim that it does not run well if at all with other AV's. Webroot runs just fine with almost every single other AV. Quite simply the notion that it may not run at all is quite outrageous in my opinion.
If that is your claim, that Webroot does not run well or at all with other AV's, please provide the names of the other AV's with which it is not compatible. I am aware of only one with which there may be issues and that is a long standing well known issue.
As for TexPhil... I really do not understand just what you mean. With changing from mentioning "WR" to "WB", as well as the claim that it does not run well if at all with other AV's. Webroot runs just fine with almost every single other AV. Quite simply the notion that it may not run at all is quite outrageous in my opinion.
If that is your claim, that Webroot does not run well or at all with other AV's, please provide the names of the other AV's with which it is not compatible. I am aware of only one with which there may be issues and that is a long standing well known issue.
Hello TEXPHIL,@ wrote:
I have found it to be compaitible with Malwarebytes Anti-Malware that I run along side of WR complete.... WB does not however run very well if at all with other AV programs.
Welcome to the Community!
Webroot can certainly run along other AVs without a problem.
Although security software companies have, traditionally, advised against running multiple antivirus programs on the same computer, this rule does not hold true for Webroot SecureAnywhere. The reason for such recommendations involved the way traditional antivirus programs run. SecureAnywhere is different.
Most antivirus software is very aggressive. When an antivirus program scans a file, it accesses that file and locks it until the scan is complete, so other programs can’t access it. If multiple real-time antivirus scanners are installed on the same system, the secondary system will attempt to scan the file the moment it is accessed by the first scan. Now, both programs are competing to scan the file. Depending on the aggressiveness of each program, one may detect the conflict as an “attack” and attempt to block the offending process. Now, the two antivirus programs are not only competing for the same file, but are actively working against one another. This causes a strong struggle for resources on your computer that can drastically impact system performance, and can leave your system more vulnerable to malware attacks.
Antispyware software, on the other hand, is non-aggressive toward antivirus software. While it may try to lock files being actively scanned, it will not compete with an antivirus program when the latter attempts to block or take control of a file. This is why antispyware applications can run alongside most antivirus protection without issue.
As mentioned above, Webroot SecureAnywhere works differently from other virus protection. SecureAnywhere does not rely on the customary system of definition sets to make determinations. Instead, this new program examines file behavior and system interaction closely to determine if files are malicious or not. Only files that present risk are examined.
Using the same advanced behavioral detection that determines which files are malicious, SecureAnywhere is able to recognize other virus protection software on your computer as one of “the good guys.” This means SecureAnywhere won’t block with on-access scanning or try to break through legitimate lockouts. In this way, potential software conflicts, and the resulting system slowness and vulnerability, can be avoided. You can run SecureAnywhere alongside another antivirus program safely.
For tips on running SecureAnywhere with another antivirus product, click here.
WSA has been designed from the ground up to be co-operative with other AV/IS apps and cede to them if they duplicate protect ion and then step in if something get through or they do not protect for something specifically. We have run WSA with KIS & other AVs and there are several other users here who have similar experiences with running in tandem with other security apps with no issues.
Except in the case of BitDefender for which there are some known issues...so best to avoid.
And as shorTcircuit has stated before:
Keep in mind that while Webroot is compatible, and the Webroot installer knows it, the installers of the others do not know this: they may give a compatibility error and refuse to install if Webroot is already installed. Simply make sure the other AV is installed first, then add Webroot.
Please explain what you are saying to us?
Thank you
Regards,
Any chance of problems with running WSA with an anti-malware program that has an aggressive behavior analysis blocker?
How about a chance of conflicts with another A/V that also has a roll back action?
Your competitiors are trying to catch up with WSA and are including similar types of features.When I ran WSA with KIS I always wondered about both programs attempting a rollback and with NIS I wondered about conflicts with their Sonar which has allledgedly been made more aggrewssive in NS.
How about a chance of conflicts with another A/V that also has a roll back action?
Your competitiors are trying to catch up with WSA and are including similar types of features.When I ran WSA with KIS I always wondered about both programs attempting a rollback and with NIS I wondered about conflicts with their Sonar which has allledgedly been made more aggrewssive in NS.
While in theory there might be, but up to now there have been no reports of problems like that. I admit I do not have experience with KIS 2015 and Norton 2015, but with the 2014 versions there did not appear to be any problems at all, other than making sure that the other AV is installed first. The KIS installer does ID Webroot as a problem and may refuse to install. So.. just install KIS first, then Webroot, and everything has worked just fine.
One thing that can be done, though not usually needed, is simply to make sure to "Allow" the executable files of each AV within the other just in case. Some people do that, some don't.
One thing that can be done, though not usually needed, is simply to make sure to "Allow" the executable files of each AV within the other just in case. Some people do that, some don't.
Another comment to make here...
When WSA and another AV are installed at the same time, WSA takes a quiet back seat. It will only react if the other AV has missed something. So, in the event of a malware that would trigger both the "other guy", AND WSA, as well as trigger the rollback function of both, WSA would not trigger as the other AV is already on the job with the detection and rollback.
If the 'other guy' fails to detect the infection, as soon as the file is accessed WSA will step in, detect the problem, and handle it.
That behavior is why WSA is generally so extremely compatible with other AV's, but it is just fine as a standalone as well.
That was a GREAT question! Thank you.. it really made me think a bit 🙂
When WSA and another AV are installed at the same time, WSA takes a quiet back seat. It will only react if the other AV has missed something. So, in the event of a malware that would trigger both the "other guy", AND WSA, as well as trigger the rollback function of both, WSA would not trigger as the other AV is already on the job with the detection and rollback.
If the 'other guy' fails to detect the infection, as soon as the file is accessed WSA will step in, detect the problem, and handle it.
That behavior is why WSA is generally so extremely compatible with other AV's, but it is just fine as a standalone as well.
That was a GREAT question! Thank you.. it really made me think a bit 🙂
I've run WSA with Norton's New NS and am not aware of any issues. Web browsing may be a fraction of a second quicker with either alone.
But that's just the thing - how would I be aware if there was an issue as long as my PC runs well?
Faith-) lol
Despite Webroots attempts I used Prevx too long to think of WSA as being a stamd-alone-solution :-)
I have read something about old dogs and teaching them new tricks and leading a thirsty horse to a fresh running pure watered river( if you know of one in the USA please let me know-a clean river I mean - I know plenty of places to find a horse.)
But that's just the thing - how would I be aware if there was an issue as long as my PC runs well?
Faith-) lol
Despite Webroots attempts I used Prevx too long to think of WSA as being a stamd-alone-solution :-)
I have read something about old dogs and teaching them new tricks and leading a thirsty horse to a fresh running pure watered river( if you know of one in the USA please let me know-a clean river I mean - I know plenty of places to find a horse.)
Well, now that IS a very good question LOL! (And for once...I am not sure I have a good answer.......) Just make sure the AV's are up to date, and run them daily is the best we can do on that one!@ wrote:
I've run WSA with Norton's New NS and am not aware of any issues. Web browsing may be a fraction of a second quicker with either alone.
But that's just the thing - how would I be aware if there was an issue as long as my PC runs well?
Faith-) lol
:)
Sorry shortcut I updated my last post while you were responding to the first version.
No worries 🙂 I replied a bit too quick. I often pause a few minutes just in case of edits :)@ wrote:
Sorry shortcut I updated my last post while you were responding to the first version.
Anyway, as to what you added, you are not alone. There are other former Prevx users who still feel just like you do: keep it installed, but have a secondary as well for a layered approach.
I personally do not at this time, but SOME of the former Prevx users no longer do either, but you are still far from alone. And there is nothing wrong with that at all. Webroot still has the approach to remain compatible just so that those who still prefer the layered approach can still do so knowing that it will work.
From what I have seen if you use NS you need a layered approach :-) They started a sale price at 3:00 AM on Thurs. I was too tired at that hour to resist.
Proof of concept: NS Live Update servers went down for twp hours immediately after I Installed it.
Proof of concept: NS Live Update servers went down for twp hours immediately after I Installed it.
My own opinion is if you use Norton, you just need to uninstall and replace LOL! A layered approach with WSA DOES work, I have a client that is using that with great success. Before we added the WSA though the NIS was just letting too much through... poor computer was at almost a standstill.@ wrote:
From what I have seen if you use NS you need a layered approach :-) They started a sale price at 3:00 AM on Thurs. I was too tired at that hour to resist.
LOL: You responded to my post too soon again which I updated while you were posting 🙂
LOL! That is OK.. it is just a part of what makes the Community fun :)
Oh I HATE the Live Update.... I really do. For one thing, due to that, you end up with what is it... 3 different items in the Programs area of the Control panel that would need to be removed? The overall size is HUGE, and the updates are very slow coming in. The last time I installed NIS it took something like an hour to 90 minutes between download, install, download update, scan, etc etc.
Once it is all in, as a part of a layered solution, it works, but not as well as it used to. Years ago I used to reccomend Norton to new computer users, but it has gotten to large and so much more difficult to work with that I no longer feel it is suitable for a new user. It also just plain misses more now than it used to.
Oh I HATE the Live Update.... I really do. For one thing, due to that, you end up with what is it... 3 different items in the Programs area of the Control panel that would need to be removed? The overall size is HUGE, and the updates are very slow coming in. The last time I installed NIS it took something like an hour to 90 minutes between download, install, download update, scan, etc etc.
Once it is all in, as a part of a layered solution, it works, but not as well as it used to. Years ago I used to reccomend Norton to new computer users, but it has gotten to large and so much more difficult to work with that I no longer feel it is suitable for a new user. It also just plain misses more now than it used to.
Well, I had been using Kaspersky forever starting over a decade ago when it was being sold by some small sales affiliate here and was little known until "the new Norton" came out. I had learned to detest Norton Products as many did, because their products had a way of taking over control of certain aspects of your PC. So I decided to give NIS 2013 a try and actually bought NIS 2014 which I immefdately uninstalled the week after I bought it after seeing two YouTube Reviews where a zero access rootkit was able to totally disable NIS and let in about 90 other malware. Immediately uninstalled it and ran down to my local big box brick and mortar store and bought KIS 2014 which they were selling at a deeply discounted intro price.@ wrote:
My own opinion is if you use Norton, you just need to uninstall and replace LOL! A layered approach with WSA DOES work, I have a client that is using that with great success. Before we added the WSA though the NIS was just letting too much through... poor computer was at almost a standstill.@ wrote:
From what I have seen if you use NS you need a layered approach :-) They started a sale price at 3:00 AM on Thurs. I was too tired at that hour to resist.
About a month ago because of a Windows update or a game update I had to reinstall NIS because it was the only IS Suite that would allow my PC to connect to the server of my favorite on-line game. There was nothing I could do with KIS to reach that server-exceptions,white lists, untrusted mode, WSA was the same way and I was too lazy at that point to make an attempt at exceptions in WSA, so I just reinstalled NIS 2014 w/o WSA. So thats how I got back interested in NS. The problem, either with Windows or the game's server, was eventually fixed. But prior to that, I had to buy a new subscription and they are adding unused days of existing licenses to a newly purchased subscription for NS, so I now have WSA running with a 665 day subscription to NS LOL.
The best thing I can say about NS is that my PC runs with it like there is no A/V installed and that's probably cause there isn't 🙂
Sounds like you are in good hands with the layer of NIS and WSA. I hope NIS improves the product though, as I am not sure I could deal with having almost 2 years left on something I might not use LOL!
I have used KIS in the past.. though not recently. I am pretty familiar with the 2014 version though. It also is a good choice if one wants a layered approach, it gets along with WSA pretty well usually. I am not surprised at the problem you had, though if you had brought it to their attention I am a bit surprised that it was not fixed. I do think KIS and NIS are on average a bit slower on handling issues and getting fixes rolled out though. Just my own opinion.
My biggest problem with NIS is related to what you said: it simply is too big, tries to do too much, and does the same job other AV's do but with a LOT more interference to the OS. I don't even know how many times I have dealt with someone who after uninstalling NIS had no internet connection due to how it works. There just has to be a better way that will not make things so much more difficult. For me, even though I am pretty much a dedicated WSA user I do a bit of testing and experimenting too to keep up with things. WIth WSA that is easy, but installing NIS to test it out and remove it is a LOT more of a pain than it is worth.
I have used KIS in the past.. though not recently. I am pretty familiar with the 2014 version though. It also is a good choice if one wants a layered approach, it gets along with WSA pretty well usually. I am not surprised at the problem you had, though if you had brought it to their attention I am a bit surprised that it was not fixed. I do think KIS and NIS are on average a bit slower on handling issues and getting fixes rolled out though. Just my own opinion.
My biggest problem with NIS is related to what you said: it simply is too big, tries to do too much, and does the same job other AV's do but with a LOT more interference to the OS. I don't even know how many times I have dealt with someone who after uninstalling NIS had no internet connection due to how it works. There just has to be a better way that will not make things so much more difficult. For me, even though I am pretty much a dedicated WSA user I do a bit of testing and experimenting too to keep up with things. WIth WSA that is easy, but installing NIS to test it out and remove it is a LOT more of a pain than it is worth.
I have found it to be compaitible with Malwarebytes Anti-Malware that I run along side of WR complete.... WR does not however run very well if at all with other AV programs.I have found that running Windows Security for example, along side WR presents a compaitibilty issue...
Well, nothing works well with Microsoft because Microsoft is just plain the worst AV out there according to many ratings. Other than that, WSA has been found to be fully compatible and does not cause problems.@ wrote:
I have found it to be compaitible with Malwarebytes Anti-Malware that I run along side of WR complete.... WR does not however run very well if at all with other AV programs.I have found that running Windows Security for example, along side WR presents a compaitibilty issue...
If you have specific examples other than Microsoft, please do let us know as Webroot would be interested in this. They are still commited to maintaining as high a degree of compatibility as possible.
If you have followed the conversation on this thread, or many other threads, you will find that a vast majority of users have not problems using WSA with another AV solution in a layered approach.
Criticism is of course welcome here, but it should be presented with a bit of data and examples, otherwises just repeating the same statements becomes essentially just trolling.
I absolutely agree with you regarding Windows Security... I do NOT run. it I have tried it in the past just to be more familiar with it and it had a problem with WR... I have been running WR for many years and have not had a problem with it... I think it is more other AV apps that have the problem.. I personally try to run only one AV and that is WR Secure Complete. Their HDQS are just up the road on the northern end of town from where I live and I like dealing with a company that is esentially local. As I mentioned earlier I do run Malwarebytes A/M along side of WR without any problems to note. After years of use I have all the reasons to have complete faith in WR. I also run Adware occassionally to keep adware under control. I do however wished WR would incorporate this into their software.
My settings window does not look like yours.... This must be from another version.
Hello TEXPHIL,@ wrote:
I absolutely agree with you regarding Windows Security... I do NOT run. it I have tried it in the past just to be more familiar with it and it had a problem with WR... I have been running WR for many years and have not had a problem with it... I think it is more other AV apps that have the problem.. I personally try to run only one AV and that is WR Secure Complete. Their HDQS are just up the road on the northern end of town from where I live and I like dealing with a company that is esentially local. As I mentioned earlier I do run Malwarebytes A/M along side of WR without any problems to note. After years of use I have all the reasons to have complete faith in WR. I also run Adware occassionally to keep adware under control. I do however wished WR would incorporate this into their software.
We are trying to incorporate this in our Ideas Exchange. As you can see here
PUA's that:
- Come in with other downloads
- Have a clear opt out ability prior to install
are often NOT detected and removed. This is partly for legal reasons: the source of the download can complain about it's extra software being blocked automatically by Webroot. There may be to allow WSA to recognize and block a LOT more PUA's than it currently can. Please see THIS IDEA for more information, and give a KUDO if you agree. User Idea requests are noted by the Webroot Team, and the more Kudo's on an Idea the more likely we may see dev time devoted to it.
Regards,
EDIT: Sherry beat me to it! :)
I would like you to communicate with Webroot directly, maybe via Trouble Ticket or if we need to we can go thorugh the Community Admin@ to report any real compatibility issues. Even if they are primarily on the side of the 'other av' there may be things Webroot Dev's can do to make it as compatible as possible, just as they have worked to so up until now.
On that Adware stuff, you have a REALLY GOOD POINT there.. we are all frustrated with that to a degree. These are things that are not really malware or spyware, so while WSA does pick up a lot of them, and they are adding more there are a lot that are not yet detected.
Generally speaking PUA's that:
are often NOT detected and removed. This is partly for legal reasons: the source of the download can complain about it's extra software being blocked automatically by Webroot. There may be to allow WSA to recognize and block a LOT more PUA's than it currently can. Please see THIS IDEA for more information, and give a KUDO if you agree. User Idea requests are noted by the Webroot Team, and the more Kudo's on an Idea the more likely we may see dev time devoted to it.
Pretty much EVERYONE here agrees that WSA does indeed need stronger PUA protection.
I would like you to communicate with Webroot directly, maybe via Trouble Ticket or if we need to we can go thorugh the Community Admin
On that Adware stuff, you have a REALLY GOOD POINT there.. we are all frustrated with that to a degree. These are things that are not really malware or spyware, so while WSA does pick up a lot of them, and they are adding more there are a lot that are not yet detected.
Generally speaking PUA's that:
- Come in with other downloads
- Have a clear opt out ability prior to install
- Are easy and clear to remove
are often NOT detected and removed. This is partly for legal reasons: the source of the download can complain about it's extra software being blocked automatically by Webroot. There may be to allow WSA to recognize and block a LOT more PUA's than it currently can. Please see THIS IDEA for more information, and give a KUDO if you agree. User Idea requests are noted by the Webroot Team, and the more Kudo's on an Idea the more likely we may see dev time devoted to it.
Pretty much EVERYONE here agrees that WSA does indeed need stronger PUA protection.
Hi TEXPHIL@ wrote:
My settings window does not look like yours.... This must be from another version.
Will this help you here below?
SecureAnywhere is compatible with other security software, including Windows Defender. If you would like more information about why Webroot is compatible with other antivirus programs, click here.
If you have Windows 7, you can turn on Windows Defender, if you choose.
In Windows 8, Windows Defender's capabilities were expanded, making incompatible with many security software programs. For this reason, Windows Defender is disabled if it sees a potentially conflicting security software installed. Although Windows Defender turns off when Webroot SecureAnywhere appears in the Action Center, that is not necessary since they are actually compatible.
If you have Windows 8 and you would like to enable Windows Defender, contact support for assistance.
Also we have the USER GUIDE if you wish to look through.
Hope this helps,
That is right on about W Defender... Moving on... I am running W 10 on another lap top and I am seeing WSAC compatibility issues with that OS. Supposedly, if your apps will run on W Vista, then theoretically they should run on W10. But I do understand that the new OS will create issues in it's infancy... I do hope WR will incorpaorate adware and upgrade their Malware in the future to make it an all around excellent AV,AM and adware app....
YEs, there are a lot of issue with W10 at the moment. Of course Webroot Dev' have not had time yet to really dig in to the new files yet. A member here, @ has already been testing and sending in reports of all files he finds are having issues to get them started on the Whitelist process.
One thing that makes WSA work well is the cloud based, but it also makes a lot of work when new OS's are on the way. Every file has a unique hash called an "MD5". Files are whitelisted based on that, not the file name. That is why if a file is corrupted by malware, or malware attempts to slip in by using a known windows process name, it gets caught. The MD5 is different.
New OS have basically ALL files that need to be checked and whitelisted. The computer WILL run a little slower when ALL files are in the Monitor state. As new files are whitelisted and thus Allow, and less files are in Monitor state, WSA will have a LOT less journalling to do. That is in a nutshell why there will be problems with W10 at the moment, but most will be corrected by the time of release.
One thing to note of course. While Webroot Dev's are intereseted in W10 and making WSA fully compatible and efficient, since W10 is in a pre-release or Beta form, it is officially not supported by Webroot.
One thing that makes WSA work well is the cloud based, but it also makes a lot of work when new OS's are on the way. Every file has a unique hash called an "MD5". Files are whitelisted based on that, not the file name. That is why if a file is corrupted by malware, or malware attempts to slip in by using a known windows process name, it gets caught. The MD5 is different.
New OS have basically ALL files that need to be checked and whitelisted. The computer WILL run a little slower when ALL files are in the Monitor state. As new files are whitelisted and thus Allow, and less files are in Monitor state, WSA will have a LOT less journalling to do. That is in a nutshell why there will be problems with W10 at the moment, but most will be corrected by the time of release.
One thing to note of course. While Webroot Dev's are intereseted in W10 and making WSA fully compatible and efficient, since W10 is in a pre-release or Beta form, it is officially not supported by Webroot.
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.