X

New in 2017.12: More efficient logs and license management

If you’ve read our recent 2017 in review article, you will know that building the most efficient protection software while keeping it as simple and easy to use as possible is very close to our hearts. As we continue to evolve our solutions and add new features, we regularly review the status quo and think about how we can implement existing functionality in smarter, more elegant ways for our customers.

We trust you’ll enjoy the tweaks and refinements we have made for our 2017.12 product updates. If you have got more ideas on how we can create an even better protection experience, then let us know in the comments. We love hearing suggestions from you, our customers.

All 2017.12 improvements in a nutshell

Emsisoft Anti-Malware

Universal forensics log for easy search and analysis

Emsisoft Enterprise Console

Emsisoft Emergency Kit

How to obtain the new version

As always, so long as you have auto-updates enabled in the software, you will receive the latest version automatically during your regularly scheduled updates, which are hourly by default. New users, please download the full installer from our product pages.

Note to Enterprise users: If you have chosen to receive “Delayed” updates in the Update settings for your clients, they will receive the new software version no earlier than 30 days after the regular “Stable” availability. This gives you time to perform internal compatibility tests before a new version gets rolled out to your clients automatically.

Have a great, well-protected day and start to 2018!

Categories: Emsisoft News
Emsi :

View Comments (12)

  • Need I say again I'm very much unhappy with any removal of a setting? What the... ??? Very specifically in this case, I do NOT want the software to determine how much logging to keep (I would want the issue that makes it not display all be fixed though, been going on for a heck of a long time)! But, of course, I do not want software to automatically decide ANYTHING unless I choose to allow it to, period. (Couldn't find any use myself for the other 2 removed settings, but maybe someone did, and either way if they can obviously exist, why the heck remove them? GAH!)
    As for the unified logging, will remain to be seen whether the filters can work at least as well as the tabs. If implemented properly, don't see why it shouldn't be essentially the same thing, just maybe giving a marginally more tidy appearance, and with improved filters (don't see any in that image) it may even be more useful. However, since the forensic logging was added and the logging tab automatically opened that first, it introduced the problem of the program possibly hanging for a long time while it loads that large full log after it hadn't been checked in a while and there are many entries. Now this may be worsened.

    • We are aware that many customers chose our products because they are highly customizable. Rest assured we don't want to move away from that. But nobody is really helped if we keep dozens of features alive just for the sake of keeping them alive, if almost nobody still uses them. Settings should always be seen in a time context. We're constantly adding new things if we see a strong demand, but some things simply get outdated and irrelevant over time, so we remove them if they don't meet our objectives anymore.

      Admitted, the logging setting is debatable to some extent, but there were good reasons for removing it. If users accidentally define a too low logging limit, they risk missing important logs in case of an emergency. If they set the limit too high, processing of the logs can have a significant negative effect on the overall performance of the software. But the main reason for removing it was that since we introduced the new advanced forensic logging, it wasn't clear to which log types the limit actually applied. Say you set the limit to 100 log entries and it applies to all logs together (Forensics), keep the software running/updating for a few weeks until all 100 entries are full. From then, the software would purge the oldest scan logs (because they'are also part of the 100 overall entries), leaving you with an empty scan log list after a short while. If the limit applies to the individual log types, you may wonder why the combined forensics log is longer than the set limit. Not a satisfactory solution either, you see.

      There are more logically difficult to resolve issues like that, so we found that the best way to satisfy our users is to let the software manage the log size. If the log gets too long, you can still clear it at any time. But after all, we think that the main objective here is to actually have a powerful log available when you need it. That didn't change. All details how that is technically implemented are not really worth wasting GUI space for, in my opinion.

      • You seem to be moving away from it for years... And keyword in "almost nobody" is "almost". Some do, or might, and if they can exist, why not?
        My logging limit is 1000, but never worked right as far as I could tell, even without the bug making it just display the most recent 10 since the last check, then skipping to those displayed when the log in question was last displayed. And would personally prefer to have large logs to be able to dig through old info if I want to, but to have them load only as needed when displayed, a simple way being to have pages with a number of entries, say 50 or 100, instead of the whole thing load at once.
        And when you add a problem, don't think the solution is to remove the whole element that your addition created it in. Personally in that case I'd think the logging limit should apply to each logging module, with the forensics being the total, no separate limit for it, just gathering together what it has (definitely wouldn't wonder why it's longer). But, again, should load incrementally, just process a couple of screens' worth when first loading, load more if needed.
        So you say if the log gets too long you can clear it, but what if it's too short, doesn't hold as much as you want? Or what if it is too long but you want to keep recent entries? So, you know, the problems solved by a customizable limit (if it'd work right).
        And EAM GUI is quite clear, not cluttered at all, large active spots to click, can definitely take a whole lot more stuff.

      • I tend to disable logging from software that allows it, mostly to prevent unnecessary extra writes from the SSD. If I'll need the logging I'll enable it. I know it's minimal -perhaps even irrelevant- amounts of data compared to what SSD's can tolerate today but still, removing options doesn't go down well with the intermediate/advanced user. I hope you don't continue with this trend of removing stuff to avoid "user confusion" in the name of the "best, automatic" decisions. Having said this, your software is still excellent but please don't over-simplify it. This process never ends well for the software in question.

  • Should implement something like a package of skins, to customize the appearance (color), this white kills my eyes, instead of white should be black or something, the rest is perfect :)

    • Fine by me as long as any switch is optional, more customization is always better. But personally find the EAM theme just right, like white, non-dark blue, some greens, light gray, and stay away from dark or too bright colors, and this just mixes the nice ones and avoids what I want to avoid. But, again, yep, user-selectable themes would be nice in general.

  • Oh... I use to disable the logs creation in my softwares. Also I use to tweak the number of simultaneous update connections when updating, as when using the default high value my laptop tends to increase the fans speed and the sound is annoying. So I lower it and everything is OK.

  • By the way, the "View/Selected components" selection is not remembered. After a sign out/in it always resets back to View all components.

  • These changes look good. Anyone who is worried about read and write on an SSD might be better off looking at buying an SSHD. I know that my company uses their computers 24/7 and we have had the MX200 with no SSD failures since install. I have heard of others who have had Samsung SSD fail in first year or two however in same type of environment.