Alex, and other Sunbelt staff, I just have to say this: With no other commercial product that I'm familiar with do we see the CEO and the PM of the product (let alone actual support stat) on a public list working through issues like this.
This is part of why I am a fan of VIPRE. Kurt On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 14:16, Alex Eckelberry <al...@sunbelt-software.com> wrote: > Notice he said “the new VIPRE PM” > > <sigh> > > We’ll have a little chat here with some folks. > > Alex > > Alex Eckelberry, CEO > Sunbelt Software > 33 N. Garden Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33755 p: 727-562-0101 x220 > e: a...@sunbeltsoftware.com MSN: alex...@hotmail.com > w: www.sunbeltsoftware.com b: www.sunbeltblog.com > > > > > > > > From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 4:57 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > > > LOL > > > > Great! Looking forward to it. > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Stu Sjouwerman [mailto:s...@sunbelt-software.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 4:56 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > Yah. We changed that password! LOL > > We’re getting the new VIPRE PM on the list so that he can answer and clarify > some of these issues being discussed. > > > > Also, a lot of new stuff in Version 4 addresses several points mentioned. > > > > Warm regards, > > > Stu Sjouwerman > > Co-Founder, Publisher, Sunbelt Media > P: +1-727-562-0101 ext 218 > F: +1-727-562-5199 > s...@sunbelt-software.com > > > > > > > From: Crawford, Scott [mailto:crawfo...@evangel.edu] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 4:51 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > > > I predict mischief. > > From: Donald Bittenbender [mailto:dona...@sunbelt-software.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 3:49 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > > > Ok Curt, > > Obviously any mail you send to ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com will > post to the list, like below. > > It says you are receiving copy of the list emails. Make sure you don’t have > any mail filters on or they aren’t setup to go to one of your sub-folders. > > If you do have to use the web-interface to reply to messages from, login and > your username/password is: > > Username: cu...@sunbelt-software.com > Password: p...@ssw0rdmanager > > > > I show you currently subscribed to: > NTsysadmin > Ninjablade > cse > viper_enterprise > > -- > > Donald Bittenbender > > Salesforce Administrator > > IT Developer/DBA/Sysadmin > > Sunbelt Software > > > > From: Curt Larson [mailto:cu...@sunbelt-software.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 4:34 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > > > OK, I done did read all of it. Where would you like me to start? > > > > Curt Larson > > VIPRE/CounterSpy Product Manager > > Sunbelt Software > > www.SunbeltSoftware.com > > cu...@sunbeltsoftware.com > > 727-562-0101 x397 > > ________________________________ > > From: Stu Sjouwerman [mailto:s...@sunbelt-software.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 4:26 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > > > Oh, we’re reading all of it. We’ll come back with some feedback shortly. > > > > Warm regards, > > > Stu Sjouwerman > > Co-Founder, Publisher, Sunbelt Media > P: +1-727-562-0101 ext 218 > F: +1-727-562-5199 > s...@sunbelt-software.com > > > > > > > From: Tom Miller [mailto:tmil...@hnncsb.org] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 2:17 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > > > I don't see that text in the link you provided, but that (the first link) is > a pretty old discussion and there have been upgrades since then. > > > > I think what Sunbelt means is the "main" server gets its updates from > Sunbelt servers but all other servers should be pointed to that main server > for updates. Then the remote server in turn updates its agents within the > policy scope. At least that's the way it works here, very similar to how I > had Symantec working. As for the second threat that makes no sense. > > > > If I were you I'd send this thread to Sunbelt for clarification and let us > know the response. > >>>> "David Mazzaccaro" <david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com> 2/25/2010 12:34 PM >>>> >>> > > Really??? > > Both Curt and Brian from Sunbelt Software on the forum say otherwise..... > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~/SNIP/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > http://supportforums.sunbeltsoftware.com/messageview.aspx?catid=27&threadid=1155&highlight_key=y > > A remote update server pulls definitions directly from Sunbelt and downloads > them to those agents. All policies and reporting are still handled by the > VIPRE service, thus the remote machines remain in contact. The remote update > server negates the need to push updates across the T1 line from site to > site. > > Curt > > ------------------------- > Curt Larson > Product Manager > Sunbelt Software > cu...@sunbeltsoftware.com > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~/SNIP/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > http://supportforums.sunbeltsoftware.com/messageview.aspx?catid=27&threadid=2378&highlight_key=y > > VIPRE Enterprise is able to be configured as an update server, but those > updates come from the internet. Currently there is not an option to have the > remote update servers pull their definitions from a central policy server, > but it has been requested as a feature. > > ------------------------- > Brian Ross > > Malware Removal Specialist > > Sunbelt Software > > Support Contact Info: > > supp...@sunbeltsoftware.com > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~/SNIP/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > http://supportforums.sunbeltsoftware.com/messageview.aspx?catid=27&threadid=1626&highlight_key=y > > I did check into this, and we have a feature request on the backlog to add > this functionality. I do not have an ETA on that addition though. > > ------------------------- > Brian Ross > > Malware Removal Specialist > > Sunbelt Software > > Support Contact Info: > > supp...@sunbeltsoftware.com > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~/SNIP/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Tom Miller [mailto:tmil...@hnncsb.org] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 12:20 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > Remote update servers are supposed to get their updates from the main > console servers. That's the way I have my Vipre configured and it works > fine. I wonder who at Sunbelt told you remote PCs/servers should get > updates via the Internet. That's counter-intuitive for hub-and-spoke > networks. > > > > This is the doc I used to set this up here: > http://support.sunbeltsoftware.com/Default.aspx?answerid=1859 > >>>> "David Mazzaccaro" <david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com> 2/25/2010 11:58 AM >>>> >>> > > We have a VPN, I will check w/ the PIX in regards to policy and scanning. > > > > re: "If you instruct your remote update server to update from Sunbelt, that > seems odd" > > Currently, this is the only way a remote update server CAN update itself. > The main console could certainly handle pushing updates to the remote update > servers (this is how Symantec Corp Ed worked), but Vipre doesn't offer this > (yet). > > > > thx > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Tom Miller [mailto:tmil...@hnncsb.org] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 11:51 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > For your remote offices: do they connect via direct point to point/frame > relay or via a VPN? I just want to be certain. If using a VPN, does this > route via your firewall? I have many smaller sites set up this way, but be > careful if you have any scanning/blocking policies, as that may impact vipre > updates. I had some issues with remote updates and it turns out my firewall > scan policy was really slowing down updates. > > > > Yes, you really must get a remote update server at each site. Just make it > a PC, no server necessary. Then only one will update across your VPN/frame > relay. > > > > If you instruct your remote update server to update from Sunbelt, that seems > odd, since it would still have to traverse the VPN to get to HQ, then to the > Internet. Is your main Console server overloaded that it cannot handle the > remote update requests? > > > > Just trying to understand. > >>>> "David Mazzaccaro" <david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com> 2/25/2010 11:15 AM >>>> >>> > > Well, here's my situation: > > Let's start w/ my main location (location A). > Location A is our corporate headquarters. It is our only location that has > an internet connection. > We have 9 other smaller remote offices (location B, C, D, etc). > Each remote site has a T1 line connecting them to our provider's VPN cloud > and back to our corporate office. > These offices have circuits ranging from 512k - full 1.5M depending on their > size. > > > > Vipre's updates (and method of deploying these updates) is simply put... a > nightmare. > Everyday, and sometimes twice a day, sunbelt releases MASSIVE definition > updates. > So in order to stay up-to-date, I have to drag hundreds of MB across my > 512k lines (daily). > > > > Originally, the Vipre server at location A downloads the updates every 4 > hours (the most frequent setting). > Based on policies on the server at location A, updates are pushed out to the > remote offices. > Even if I configure "bandwidth throttling", all this does is slow down the > amount of time the updates will take to reach the remote users. > Often, by the time one update is finished, another one has been released. > This setup has caused major network congestion, so I attempted to deploy a > remote vipre update server on one of my desktops at a remote site. > > > > This remote update server at location B is configured to download updates > from sunbelt directly. > This is the only way a remote server can update itself. > I assumed that it would be able to pull updates from my main server in > location A, but I am being told that it has to go out to the internet to get > its updates. > So I thought one PC downloading an update over the circuit is better than a > dozen. > > > > However, here is the problem with this arrangement: > The remote update server can't be configured to throttle its own updates, so > I am still stuck pulling down 100+ MB updates over a 512k line with no > control over the bandwidth. Also, the remote update server (just like the > agents) can only be configure to get updates every x hours (not at a > specified time of day). > And… when the Vipre service restarts (due to reboot, MS update, maintenance, > power outage, whatever)… the timer starts from that point. > > > > I will say that it IS getting better, and version 4 is promising to fix this > (and several other) issues. > > > > The Vipre Enterprise forum on the Sunbelt website is a great place to keep > up w/ info: > > http://supportforums.sunbeltsoftware.com/ > > > > > > HTH > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Don Guyer [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 10:58 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: VIPRE versus Trend > > I’m right in the middle of evaluating McAfee replacements here, so keep this > type info coming, please! > > > > Also, if anyone has info (good/bad) about any vendor’s solution, please post > up. Feel free to contact me offline, if you feel that’s necessary. > > > > Thx! > > > > Don Guyer > > Systems Engineer - Information Services > > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > > Devon, PA 19333 > > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com > > > > From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:saber...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 10:35 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: VIPRE versus Trend > > > > I've had a completely different experience with Vipre Enterprise Steve. We > have had some issues with Vipre bpam service using up non-paged pool memory, > causing the server to become unresponsive, this happened on a very small > subset of servers, but a very significant subset, namely database servers > with Oracle on them. In working with Vipre support we completely disabled > quick scans, and deep scans, only using active protection on the policy > group for database servers. We also made some changes in memory management > on the servers per some MS KB articles that we researched and that Vipre > support directed us to. We haven't had any issues with this in 2-3 months. > > I've not ever used Trend, only McAfee and Vipre. Vipre management console > is great, easy and intuitive compared to McAfee's ePO. Vipre has caught > more stuff than we ever thought possible since we've implemented it, > including some password cracker applications on workstations that shouldn't > have those kind of things...... > > I've got Vipre installed on 650 nodes, and am having to up my license count > because we're out of licenses. > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Steve Kelsay <kels...@sctax.org> wrote: > > I wish I could be more optimistic, but We are using the Vipre Enterprise. It > does an excellent job of protecting us, when I can keep it running. It seems > like it just is not ready for primetime. Sunbelt had their top tech go > through our entire network setup during a recent Konficker attack, and it is > still not really stable. > > > > I can look at the console and believe it is running wonderfully, until scans > start without any identifiable cause, effectively shutting down servers with > 100% Cpu usage, but that scan never shows up on the remote console, although > the machines are sending last contact info, and last scan info, the off time > scans never show up. I lobbied hard to get Vipre, and really want it to > succeed, but it is not looking good at this time. A deep scan starts on many > machines as soon as anyone logs onto the machine, and that will also peg the > CPU meter. No reason we can tell for this to happen. > > > > From: Raper, Jonathan - Eagle [mailto:jra...@eaglemds.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 4:26 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: VIPRE versus Trend > > > > All, > > > > We’re looking to move away from McAfee. Right now we’re considering Trend > Micro OfficeScan Enterprise and the VIPRE Enterprise products. > > > > Anyone here (aside from Sunbelt employees) have any experience with both of > the current or relatively current iterations of the products? > > > > Can you provide any reasons to choose one over the other, aside from price? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Jonathan L. Raper, A+, MCSA, MCSE > Technology Coordinator > Eagle Physicians & Associates, PA > jra...@eaglemds.com > www.eaglemds.com > > > > > > ________________________________ > > Any medical information contained in this electronic message is CONFIDENTIAL > and privileged. It is unlawful for unauthorized persons to view, copy, > disclose, or disseminate CONFIDENTIAL information. This electronic message > may contain information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. It > is intended only for the use of the individual(s) and/or entity named as > recipients in the message. If you are not an intended recipient of this > message, please notify the sender immediately and delete this material from > your computer. Do not deliver, distribute or copy this message, and do not > disclose its contents or take any action in reliance on the information that > it contains. > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Sherry Abercrombie > > "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." > Arthur C. Clarke > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including attachments, is for > the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and > privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original > message. > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including attachments, is for > the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and > privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original > message. > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including attachments, is for > the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and > privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original > message. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
