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,
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.
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've been looking for a product with a set of basic PC maintenance utilities to allow users to perform functions like defrag, backup, uninstall and etc. While there are plenty of options out there, including the native Microsoft utilities which are known to be weak and limited, most 3rd party products attempt to upsell users to add anti-virus/malware, emergency recovery and etc. Obviously as a Webroot subscriber I'm not interested in purchasing software that performs functions I already have and would quite probably conflict with Webroot. I'm also a pretty big fan of Webroot and have come to trust your products to the point they are running on every PC in my home. So with this in mind I'm humbly suggesting that Webroot consider adding a new product line or possibly a new set of features to your existing products to incorporate these functions.
I realize that this may seem beyond the scope of what Webroot's core products are aimed at and may be just too much scope creep for your engineers but it's something that customers are interested in. I "admin" all the computers in our household (8 so far) and it would be a valueadd for me to be sure. Having these necessary functions available in a standardized interface that gives me more control and better performance than Microsoft's utilities would be something I'd be willing to pay for. As it stands I'm stuck looking at vendors and products that I either don't trust (think IOBit) or contain features I already have and/or don't need.
Anyone else in this boat?
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 v126.96.36.199 when there was a glich it added many processes that didn't need internet access.
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?
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.
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 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.
In the grreater scheme of things, this is really puny. But I DO have an idea! Is it possible to either change the color of read mail vs. unread mail or add an open envelope that indicates the message has been read and add a closed envelope to indicate that the message has not been read. As it is, my monitor shows the unreads as a slightly bolder font but the same color. I have a hard time determining which messages have not been read and I have missed a few.
I would like to see the abaility to adjust the amount of bandwidth that the backup and sync function uses. By being able to set a low, medium, or high usage, the backup feature can still run but the internet upload speed can be adjusted so it does not slow down regular usage so much.
I'd like to propose the option to either let me log in once in to my password manager, or have it as a per windows session, and not browser session log in.
It's annoying to have to keep logging in to my password vault in Firefox every time I close and re-open the browser. If the option is already in Webroot, please tell me where it is, I can't find it and I was surprised something like this wasn't already in it.
No one else uses this PC but myself.
It would really be useful if a member's contacts or friend list that is present in the profile is added to private message list. The friend list would appear same as in profile, on the right hand side with little icons of links for sending private messages beside the contact names.
I think it would be cool if we could get some of your bloggers and other employees to randomly post up threads asking for questions and providing answers about the security industry, life at Webroot, their background in tech, etc.
To the Webroot Software Engineer Team,
I would like to suggest that an option be added to the Advanced Options in order to use the System Optimizer on all or multiple user accounts on a home computer or business network. Currently I am only able to clean my own personal user account and being the system administrator of my family pc I would like to have the option and ability to clean all other user account which are password protected on the pc without having to ask my 9 and 12 year old and my wife to log in to their accounts and bring up the Webroot program and go to System Optimizer to clean up their own data. I also have another software in which it allows me to go to options and select various users to be able to clean which are: Current user only, All users and Selected users. This option allows me to clean and optimize the whole family PC in one click of the button without having to go to each individual user. Before I had the Pro version the software I had just the free version which only allowed me to clean whichever user I was logged into. But that is not practical when each user account is password protected. But when I found out the the Pro version gave me the ability to clean all or multiple users at once I purchased it. I think adding this feature or option to the Webroot SecureAnywhere software under Advanced Setting it will give the system administrators more manageability over thier systems whether it is a family pc or business network. I hope this suggestion and idea will help with the overall Webroot SecureAnywhere usability. I look forward to hearing back from the Webroot Software Engineer Team after looking into the feasibility of this capability added to the software. I really like the new Webroot interface and think this would be a great addition.
As I understand it, the Web Threat Shield blocks sites based on a reputation score, and sites that are believed to be new are automatically given a low reputation score -- so any new site is automatically blocked. The problem is that in the user interface, when a site is blocked, the user is not told whether it is blocked because there is actual evidence of real threats or simply because the site is believed to be new. The result is that users will be frightened away from any relatively new site, even if they have personal knowledge of its reputation (i.e., they might assume that evidence of an actual threat has been detected on the site). This problem is exaccerbated by the fact that Webroot apparently has no reliable way of determining the age of a site, so a site that has been around a long time but simply isn't yet in the Webroot database will be considered new and therefore a threat.
Instead, why not give users more information and let them decide? Rather than giving a new site a low reputation score and scaring users into thinking it is likely to contain threats, instead provide a message like the following:
Webroot does not have any information about the reputation of this website. It may be a relatively new website or an older website that is not popular enough for us to have encountered it before. You may be comfortable using this website if you have personal knowledge of its reputation, but otherwise we suggest you proceed with caution.
A message like that would provide a sufficient warning without misleading users into thinking an actual threat has been identified on a site with which they are already comfortable. If several users choose to unblock the site and proceed, you might then use that information to bump up the site's reputation and stop blocking the site altogether.
Note, this request is motivated by a recent negative Webroot experience with a site that I maintain. The site is for a small local church, so it is not widely popular and was therefore not known to Webroot. One of our church members recently reported that the site was blocked by Webroot and showed me the message indicating that the site was deemed to have a high likelihood of containing threats. Despite the fact that she knows the site and has been to it many times before, she assumed a real threat had been detected. And despite the fact that I am the creator and maintainer of the site, when I saw the warning message, I too thought perhaps some real threat had been detected. Upon further investigation, I learned that no specific threats had been detected, and that Webroot was blocking the site merely because it thought the site was new. The problem is that the site is not new -- it has been up for a full three years.
I believe Webroot is doing its customers a disservice by misleading them into thinking sites they already know and trust have been determined to have real threats, when in reality Webroot simply has zero information about the site. If you have no information about a site, simply tell the user that, and let the user decide what to do based on their personal knowledge of the site.
Webroot really needs a mac forum due to the differences in the product between windows and mac. Reading about issues on WSAC running on a windows machine does not help those of us who use a mac. Webroot could be a leader for other companies to follow. I believe this could benefit Webroot in increased subscriptions and more satisfied customers. This is my 2 cents worth.