I'd like to have a way to use the WSA Android app tp clean my Droid 2 Global (running Android 2.3) the same way that I can have WSA clean my Dell desktop's Windows Vista and laptop's Windows 7. I'm not looking to wipe my phone; I know how to make WSA do that. I just want to clean up the junk files that end up cluttering my phone as I surf the web, text message, make calls, etc.
Is Webroot planning on revamping the Reputation toolbar? Currently the bar is simply obstructive especially because it repeatedly reloads even within the same web domain. The Web of Trust has a great approach: The icon remains active and changes colors accordingly.
What do you think?
After reading & commenting on a thread in the Complete section RE: A user not being able to clear past malware history in the console - I feel it would be a good idea for a user to be able to clear past malware if required. For example a close relative of mine has some very embarrassing malware (ladies type) blocked that he didn't want me & to see & didn’t realise blocked malware was recorded & (he does now) & has no way to remove it anyway & I really think he would like to, his other half also has her phone & PC on the console & can access it
I also show others who are interested WSA my console & all it's functions & although I have only one entry I really don't want others to be able to see what is essentially a record of internet mistakes which remains there to time indefinite if the same account is renewed. Others in my immediate family righlty have access to my family WSA console including my other half & teen daughter for their phones etc & I personally would like to be able to clear my history if I needed to.
I'm not talking about secrecy here just basic privacy & if a person has for example a 5 user WSA maybe all 5 of those people may use the console at some point & this could cause some issues including possible marital disharmony etc
It would be nice to post a "Closed Sticky" on the forum that only the Moderators can change when updated on the following:
1. Current Release Version Number
2. Current Beta Version Number.
Hello Webroot Staff.
I'm posting this for consideration as a few have asked about it from Wilders Security Forums about the possibility of a Blackberry Mobile Security app for the current OS and the new version that comes out in 2013.
Blackberry Phone and Tablet.
Nice product - two ideas
To log on using your web site requires "two factor" authentication (your password and two characters of your security word). I like this additional secuirty.
However, to log on using the Webroot browser extension, only requires one (your password). Why not add the requirement for two charcters to the browser extension box?
Also, limit access to your account only by the computers or phones identified in your acount. I don't need or want access to my account by any computer or phone in the world.
Just a thought.
I am having some issues with WSA ... malfunctioning Web Shield, Identity Shield, no padlock at all etc.
Webroot tech gurus have concluded that all my problems stem from the fact that my OS language is not supported by WSA.
So I have no other chance than to require inclusion of Czech language into WSA.
I may understand that our market is not as big and thus good as others but I have very strong argument which stands by me ... All other major players in the field of PC security have their products fully localized in Czech language. Just to name a few ... Norton, ESET, Avira, Avast, Kaspersky etc. etc.
Thanks & regards,
I have just tried your new Webroot Secure Anywhere System Analyzer. I have found it quite nice but I suggest that in future versions it should tell more about the detected problem with just one click on the warning icon instead of diving into the log file, it would be perfect .
**Edit for subject line searchability
I am a closed beta tester since Webroot acquired Prevx. In fact Webroot inherited me
During such a long period I have been reporting dozens of bugs via Wilders forum before the Webroot community started. Since then I have been writing here or directly to the support. So I may dare to label myself as an experienced bug reporter
Therefore I have to admit that I really miss any tracing system for the reported bugs. The current system (via support) is quite confusing because all reports and replies by the support staff are stuffed in one never ending post what is indeed user-uncomfortable.
In this respect Opera keeps primacy. They have very sophisticated system for reporting and tracing bugs. If you report a bug you will receive an unique ID belonging to your report so it is very easy to trace that bug later on forums, in changelogs or in the closed bug tracing system.
Therefore I would welcome to have similar system in Webroot support. We need to make reporting of bugs more convenient and transparent.
I am not complaining just trying to make a good offer
Thanks & regards,
I use NIS 2013 and Webroot. I liked them both. One thing I wish Webroot had that Norton does is "system insight" (shows when programs were installed, when viruses where found, when scans were done, and performance issues such as high memory usage/high cpu usage).
Anyhow, this comes in handy for me when I need to find out:
1. When a virus was installed via a program (to find the culprit person).
2. When and what program was installed to troubleshoot Windows issues.
3. Verify and check if scheduled scans are taken place correctly.
4. Look and see what programs were used the most, usage of memory/cpu of each program, and whether the PC turns off or goes into standby.
Keep in mind (for those who don't use Norton), that this is all done in a clean calendar format.
I love Webroot, but wish there was some type of expanded log.
I would like to see a reset button for the Firewall Network Applications to remove all of the listed connections.
Reason: To remove them now it's so hard if you have many in the case before v184.108.40.206 when there was a glich it added many processes that didn't need internet access.
An idea was presented over in the Android forum, and I liked it enough that I am going to open the idea here.
The ability to way enter wildcards for blocked numbers. For example your getting calls from a place that has several numbers in a block like 111-222-3300 through 111-222-3320. Instead of having enter every number (21 numbers) is there a wild card that could be used (111-222-33XX) that would allow to block then all? (This would apply to ONLY the last 1 or 2 digits of the phone number(s) to be blocked, otherwise it will block too many.)
Remember, in the event that you have blocked 111-222-33xx to blocked the numbers above, if you get a call from 111-222-3344 it will be blocked, but at the same time that caller does, I believe, have the ability to leave a voicemail. If you find you have blocked numbers that you do not wish to, you could go back to manually blocking each individual.
Allow the Call Blocking to use a 10 digit phone number (Area Code + Phone Number) instead of requiring a full 11digit (1 + Area Code + Phone Number). Many times when I had tried to turn on a Call Block using a saved contact to provide the number, it would fail and return an error that the phone number is not valid. Incoming calls do not contain the 1 on my phone, so when saved to a contact, or if I use the call log to select the number to block, it require's editing of the number before the Call Blocker will accept it.
As of now, Webroot products are localized to 13 languages. I (and hopefully others) would like change that, by adding Hungarian to the mix. If this gets the green light, I would translate Webroot products into Hungarian as I've done a couple of localizations in the past.
I used this feature from the web portal all the time. It's more secure and reduces file redundancy. Is it still available in the new portal?
I know this has been discussed before, but I thought I’d toss it out in the Ideas Exchange Forum.
I did a comparison of WSA’s and Norton’s system cleaner features and here’s what I discovered:
Norton offers “PC Tuneup” and Webroot offers “Cleanup Now.” Both features can be automatically scheduled.
Norton’s “PC Tuneup” cleans up Windows temporary files, Internet Explorer temporary files, Internet Explorer history cleanup, startup manager, registry cleanup and disk optimization (a/k/a disk fragmenter).
WSA's “Cleanup Now” cleans up Windows Desktop (recycle bin, recent document history, start menu click history, run history, search history and start menu order history), Windows System (clipboard contents, windows temporary folder, system temporary folder, windows update temporary folder, windows registry streams, default login user history, memory dump files, cd burning storage folder and flash cookies), Internet Explorer (address bar history, cookies, temporary internet files, url history, setup log, Microsoft download folder, media player bar history, autocomplete form information and cleanup index.dat), and specific applications (Mozilla, Adobe, Sun Java and Microsoft).
WSA does not incorporate defrag into its repertoire. Norton does.
I have heard, and respect, arguments that say that Windows already has an effective defrag option (Disk Defragmenter), and the addition of a defrag feature to WSA would constitute bloatware, but is this dispositive? WSA presently incorporates a feature that cleans up your recycle bin, a feature that Windows already has (Disk Cleanup). Moreover, when you consider all of the things that System Cleaner feature presently cleans up, is it really going too far to incorporate a defrag feature as well? The WSA System Analyzer already analyzes defragmentation issues, so is it too much of a stretch to incorporate defrag into Clean Up Now?
The wsa firewall semm to have lost its flexibility in windows 8. I would like to have control over my firewall and thats why I chose to have a complete security suite and dont want to install a third party firewall nor i am not so comfortable with windows firewall settings. The wsa firewall was smooth and comfortable in custom allowing applications to connect or not in windows 7. I would like to have have the feature back in windows 8.
The security product does a great job of blocking calls, but they go straight to voicemail.
Can the option be added to reject the call? In this case, the call would be dropped or receive a busy signal and not go to voicemail.