light bulb

Did You Know?

New Idea

Restore default tray icon

Status: Under Consideration
by Community Guide The_Seeker on ‎01-25-2014 12:14 PM

I propose that a setting be added allowing the user to restore his/her default tray icon from the altered one triggered by an imminent subscription expiration.

I know that the new Web Threat Shield is under a slow rollout, and that not everything is 'set in stone' so to speak.  One thing that has been noticed by several users is a lack of usable User Interface with the new 2014 versions.  I am only human, so I make mistakes, we all do.  In the situation that a user clicks to Allow (WhiteList) a URL, and then realizes that was not the right decision, there is currently no way other than uninstalling/re-installing WSA to correct that.


Would it be possible to provide us with an interface on which locally WhiteListed URL's are shown and allow us to edit/remove listings in the event a wrong button is pushed?

Status: Under Consideration
It looks like there will be usability enhancements to the web filtering capabilities added and a UI for managing white lists is one of the enhancements we will be making, but there's not a timeframe for rolling it out yet. In the meantime, a manual editing of the whitelist.txt is the best workaround.

Just thinking, especially in the wake of all the enquiries, etc., about the rollout of the new Web Threat Shield functionality, whether it would not be useful to indicate in the main GUI when an update has taken place.  I appreciate that one can see this by howevering over the sys tray icon but this can be missed.


I was thinking along the lines of a simple indicator advising of an update (with possibly a small amount of text information, i.e., 'Updated to v8.0.4. 27' or 'Web Threat Shield upgraded')  either just under 'Scan My Computer' in the main GUI, or if that is too distracting then changing the colour of the text 'My Account', to yellow or the like, to prompt the user to look at the details.  The indicator would only remain visible until after the first access of the main GUI, after the update activity.


And if wanting to go the whole hog here then a link to the appropriate web page holding the change log info cmight also be provided...all in the interests of keeping users updated.


Just a thought for the Communities consideration. Smiley Wink



Updates Alert

Status: Under Consideration
by Frequent Voice on ‎01-08-2013 05:17 PM

I've noticed that at-least two new features have been added to the software since I purchased it. However, I had no idea the features had been implemented because no notification or message was provided. To keep users engaged and aware of new features, add an alerts box that automatically launches on the "You are protected!" main screen, which the describes the newly added feature(s).

This will increase retention because users will see the benefits of the software rather than thinking "I guess I'm just paying for regular updates, unlike Symantec who is always adding features to their software."

What are some thoughts?




Robert Salazar

Status: Under Consideration
For anyone curious about a method that already exists to be notified of features in a new release, please see my prior response. However, it's evident this request is for visibility into these changes in the program itself, so we're going to move this out of a "Feature Already Exists" status and into "Under Consideration." Rob makes some points that are well taken.

Just wondering if it would be a useful option to provide the user who overrides a Web Treat Shield Notification, i.e., clicks 'Unblock page & continue', to have theoption to file a URL Reputation Change Request at that point by providing at least a link to the relevant web page at BrightCloud?


It could be made smarter/slicker if on taking the 'Unblock page & continue' the user was automatically presented with the option on a chose or leave basis before proceeding to the requested web page.


We get a lot of requests for advice on how to deal with what the user believes is an improper blcok and such fucntinality would allow them to place the request quickly/easily.


Again, just a thought re. the improved usability of the product.






Status: Under Consideration

I merged these 2 topics together.


This one is currently under consideration.


I think its a great idea though.


Nice work @Baldrick and @durantash!

Have noticed  in the Fora that there have been a number of users reporting dissatisfaction at the way that the Personalised Security Report is notified and the control that they have over how it interacts with their systems/themselves, etc.


As a result I am starting a feature request to try to capture this centrally as this is really the place for such views to reside if change is to have a chance of being achieved IMHO.


So common issues that users feel that they need rectified are:


1. Seeing the notification message on every login.  


Suggested that that the frequency should be much more limited (maybe only show the message once per month and that the prompt should disappear by itself if not interacted with by the user after so many seconds.  As it is, the prompt only goes away if you click on "Learn More" (which opens the web page with the stats) or the "X" in the upper right (which closes the window).


So extrapolating from this the conclusion to draw here is the provision of user definable parameters for (i) number of prompts to be shown & interval (in secs) before stopping & (ii) time after which prompt/notification will auto disappear if not responded too.


2. Ability to turn off notification


User defined setting that allows the user to decide whether they are interested in even receiving sucha report, and therefore associated notification (not that I can understand why one would not want too...Smiley Wink)


3. Control to be provided via My Account/Web Console


And one of my own, given the above:


Provision of the above above suggested settings to be handled as another option in the Web Console, very much in the same way as control of the Advanced Settings can be handled that way.  Believe that as the deployment of the report "is controlled by the backend rather than the agent" to quote JoeJ, it makes sense for any new user settings that may be provided to also effectively reside at the backend rather than the client.


Well, I hope that provides a suitable starter for further comments by those who want to make them so that we can see if the feature (which I personally like) can be enhanced.


So please post & comment away, folks...Smiley Very Happy


EDIT: To add point 4. (from David's comments below)


Provision of the ability to be able to view the latest/last Report published "On Demand".  Suggestion is the addition of a permanent tool or option, to access this, under the Utilities, Reports tab.  Thanks, David...a very good one!






Status: Under Consideration
Just heard back that this one is under consideration by the product management team. I'll update when they've made a determination.

Identity Shield Enhancements

Status: Under Consideration
by Gold VIP on ‎01-27-2015 08:16 AM

Can we have two separate lists, Protect and Allow/Deny, to the Identity Shield as some have said that they would like to Protect an App but they also want to be able to Allow or Deny an App from seeing Protected Data. I can see the benefit of this option myself and other Advanced users.




Daniel Smiley Wink

Hi there


I know that the WP7 community is small (and in some circles WP7 is derided as not a serious mobile OS) but I believe that its acceptance is on the raise and therefore I was wondering if anyone knows of any plans by Webroot to include support for OS via the Mobile Security application.


One of the reasons I went for Essentials 2012 rather than Complete 2012 is the lack of this support.


Personally I hope that there are plans afoot and that the omission (IMHP) is rectified soon.


Any thoughts or observations about the inclusion in the Webroot apps (not about which mobile O/S is best) welcome.






Request serious consideration to incorporate the remaining (all) functions from original Window Washer into Webroot Essentials, including free space space washing & clean complete computer function downlaod to start-up disc.


Status: Under Consideration
We've been making some progress on this in a piecemeal fashion by returning the ability to schedule cleanups, which had been one of the missing features from Window Washer. So parts of the request may happen, while other parts might not. Which feature do you want to see the most? It would be great to get a sense of priority on which of these features are the most important to everyone. Thanks Smiley Happy

Block All Bundled Software

Status: Under Consideration
by Silver VIP ‎10-07-2014 11:48 AM - edited ‎10-07-2014 11:55 AM

We get a lot of questions/issues/complaints around PUA's.  They are one of the most irritating things.  WSA blocks many of them, but for a variety of reasons not all.  Specifically PUA's that are bundled with other software, are not hidden, have an opt out ability, are not currently blocked by Webroot.


Would it be possible to add a feature that the end user can choose when installing new software to block ALL bundled software?  That would:


1) Be an active choice by the user to block the bundles


2) Reduce vastly the number of PUA issues that we see


3) Keep things quite legal.


4) Help keep Webroot above and beyone the competition.  Smiley Happy


Status: Under Consideration

I've had some conversations with folks internally about this, and it's a thorny issue.  Having a separate category for "technically legal but still unwanted" would require massive infrastructure changes, and categorizing them as bad would open up a legal can of worms.  I'm still pushing for the latter, and I'll update you guys when I have some news.

When I submit a file through webroot program, I get no feedback. At all.


I would like  to see a page listing all the files I have submitted, and the results, including the malware designation if such was given.


Really need this.

Status: Under Consideration
At the moment, you'd want to go through support, as Tony suggested, if you would like to receive a response. This topic has seen significant discussion lately, and what are likely going to do moving forward is create a web portal for file submissions. At which point, we would either modify the submission feature in the program to direct to the portal or remove it entirely in favor of the portal. I suspect the email address provided by Tony will ultimately probably start auto-replying with a link to the portal, once we have that ready. We really like your idea about having unique stats pages. We'll keep it in mind going forward.
0 Kudos

Expanding the Forums

Status: Under Consideration
by Frequent Voice on ‎07-09-2015 03:09 PM

I was wondering if there was any way we could expand the forums to gain a larger and more active forums. We could add like a computer build forum or a request forum. For example, if someone needed a new avatar for their account or something like that. I would like to see people stick around longer than just asking a question and never coming back.

Status: Under Consideration

I'm happy to expand the community, but my philosophy is to do it organically based on demand.  The risk of the "if you build it they will come" approach is that we build out forums and then they end up being empty and it makes the site look bad.


So if you'd be interested in talking about computer building you can do that in the Techie forum here:

and if there's enough people talking about it on a regular basis then we'll break it out into a separate forum.

0 Kudos


In my scheduled scan settings I have "Hide the scan progress window during scheduled scans" unchecked and "Only notify me if an infection is found during a scheduled scan" checked. The behaviour with these settings is that when a scheduled scan starts, the progress window pops up and show the progress but doesn't automatically close after the scan. Shouldn't it close automatically because I have "Only notity when infection is found.. " still checked?
I found this in the help file:


Hide the scan progress window during scheduled scans

Runs scans silently in the background. If this option is disabled, a window opens and shows the scan progress.  

Only notify me if an infection is found during a scheduled scan

Opens an alert only if it finds a threat. If this option is disabled, a small status window opens when the scan completes, whether a threat was found or not.


So if only the first is unchecked it should show only the progress and then close automatically and if only the second is unchecked it should give a pop-up when the scan is completed.

Status: Under Consideration
This is behaving properly. The scan window is not hidden per Box A, so when the scan completes, it shows the results of the scan. Box B indicates it will "open" an alert only if it finds a threat. However, the alert is already open because of Box A being unchecked. What we can do however is consider adding a third option to "close" the scan screen if no threat is found.

Warning / Note on All Support Tickets in Queue

Status: Under Consideration
by Bronze VIP on ‎10-22-2012 12:05 PM
Windows 7

In response to this post:



MikeR wrote:

 Your ticket is being handled by one of our threat research members and was responded to yesterday. The support system brings your ticket to the top of the queue when you post a new response. The reason you did not get a hastier response when you re-opened your ticket is because you posted 7 times in a row. When you do this, the ticket shows up as a new request and it actually works against you. Tickets are handled in the order they come in and when you post 7 times in a row, it looks like the 7th post was the most recent one and it becomes a "newer" response.




There should be a Warning or Note on All Support Tickets from the Member letting the Member know that this will happen if the Member keeps posting without a response from Support.

Maybe it should also have a time limit say 24 hrs or so. If you don't have a response from Support ask about it on the Forum. That way the members Support Ticket will stay in queue and not be taken as a new request.

Status: Under Consideration
Support is investigating ways they can go about facilitating this request. Thanks for the suggestion Smiley Happy

I think that it would be a good thing to include the option to add user-based rules to the firewall. It's like this:

At the moment, if we want to block an application from being executed, we can manually add it using the following steps: PC Security -> Quarantine -> (Detection Configuration) Configure.

However, we cannot (at the moment) do the same thing if we want to block an application's access to the Internet. We just can't manually block it from using the Internet BEFORE it is executed. In order to block an application, we would have to go the PC Security -> Firewall -> (Select) Warn if any process connects to the Internet unless explicitly allowed -> [Access the application] -> See it in the Firewall table (accessed from PC Security -> Firewall -> View Network Applications) -> Block that application -> Then revert the Firewall heuristics to their previous settings.

As you can see, the process is more complicated than it should be. I think that an "Add/Remove Rule" button should be added to the Firewall table (accessed from PC Security -> Firewall -> View Network Applications), so we could make a choice about a certain application before it is executed. Thus, there would be no need to fiddle with the Firewall heuristics every single time you want to block a certain something.

I also think it is worth mentioning that other vendors (that I shall not name) who offer similar overall protection solutions already have this feature included in their products.

In my opinion, this shouldn't be a complicated thing to do, because the code from the Detection Configuration table [PC Security -> Quarantine -> (Detection Configuration) Configure] could be reused to accomplish this.

Thank you for your time and please tell me your opinion about this.

Status: Under Consideration
This idea has prompted some interesting discussions. We're going to flesh out the idea a bit more with our development and product management teams and give the idea some well-deserved consideration. Thanks for the idea!

Anti-Theft function for PC

Status: Under Consideration
by Sr. Community Expert Advisor on ‎12-28-2012 05:28 AM

I would like to see Anti-Theft feature in WSA for PC.


It should work more less in the same way like for Android. It means you should be able to localize your stolen or lost PC, send commands to lock it etc. You could even implement tracking of PC using inbuilt web-cam.


Let's utilize MyWebroot in its full potential and further enhance WSA for PC!

Status: Under Consideration
While keeping in mind the information I mentioned earlier about having an IP Address available in the online console, which serves as a method for tracking a stolen computer, the request is clearly for a more robust feature than that. After talking this through, there are a number of factors that need to be investigated in order to determine if this is a feature that Webroot should develop. This idea will be Under Consideration while we continue analyzing those factors. Kudos always help too! This was a productive discussion Pegas, and we'll keep digging deeper into this potential feature. Thanks!



I was wondering if it would be possible to add a "Backup & Sync" line to the "Status Notification Screen" that appears over the system tray at startup (some users may have this disabled).



Then if Backup & Sync were ever turned off you would get a red "x" like you currently do when any shield or firewall is disabled.




Then possibly also change the GUI so that if the Backup & Sync feature is turned off for any reason, that the GUI turns red or brown like it currently does when any of the shields or firewall are disabled. (Also resulting in an exclamation point appearing on the Webroot icon in the system tray.)



Just a suggestion, considering the recent problem with B & S.

Status: Under Consideration

We're actually already considering implementing something like this, so I'll let you guys know if it makes it into a future dev cycle.

0 Kudos

Webroot Reputation Toolbar

Status: Under Consideration
by Frequent Voice on ‎04-28-2013 01:00 PM

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?




Robert Salazar

Release Version Number & Beta Version Number Post.

Status: Under Consideration
by Bronze VIP on ‎04-07-2012 08:23 AM
Windows 7

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.

The Webroot interface is difficult for people who rely on screen readers to use. The biggest problem is a lack of keyboard control. For example, someone with a vision impairment can't independently install the product, because you need to click in the field where the license key needs to be entered (you can't tab to it). While screen readers do provide some limited review capabilities by simulating mouse movement and clicks, this is a difficult way to access an interface, particularly when you're trying to learn it, and the product could benefit greatly both from making the interface able to be controlled using the keyboard, as well as using Active Accessibility or UIA, to provide information to screen readers about major elements, e.g, what's turned on or off in status, information about scan results, etc. I could provide more information to developers if anyone is interested.

Status: Under Consideration
We plan user interface changes that will be included in our 2014 release due this fall. At this point there are no specific changes planned to address accessibility issues, but we will look to see what can be included that might help.