F-Secure Needs to Make an Official Announcement Regarding All the Changes in v19.9 = Avira

Hello,

Just as a discussion among F-Secure users. // small edit: and taking into account the overall seriousness of things. as well as possible "rejection" of some third-party components (for example, 'Avira') as a someone's own perception. that is, I do not denounce anyone's understanding or opinion.

The leadership at F-Secure needs to provide a detailed answer regarding all the changes in Windows v19.9.

.. when this becomes a public release?

regarding what things? changes in terms of service, privacy terms? possibilities for providing protection and level of reliability? or just release notes? how much detailed then, as usual with something like mentions of switching to a native 64bit version; or updating from .NET 4.7.2 to .NET 6.0; or just as that all user interfaces have been converted to .NET technology; or as a statement about the fact of switching from Aquarius to Capricorn? What kind of detailed answer are you expecting there? I mean, what is this supposed to describe to you?

I don't recall that it was described anywhere what technologies are used directly (if there is no need due to some kind of inevitable accident). For example, did you see a mention of what tool/solution was used to autoremove/detect conflicting software at the stage of installing F-Secure products?

From beta tester screenshots it is clear that F-Secure is no longer going to be F-Secure; it is going to be Avira.

why is this happening all of a sudden?

because 'Avira' produces professional utilities and tools for professionals to use in their solutions? And even uses them in their own?

Like many other companies producing tools, services that other companies can use in their solutions? And many other companies use other companies produce to increase their effectiveness (financial, technical, whatever)?

I think the description of the rumors does not accurately convey the possible changes. And the rumor is often exaggerated.

DeepGuard has also "silently" been replaced with Avira's behavioral analysis.

DeepGuard has always meant behavioral analysis, but directly a specific approach or implementation. Long before it became super popular. So called "proactive on-host protection against new and emerging threats" or "network host-based intrusion prevention (NHIPS)" earlier.

as competitiveness increases, the difference may only be in the database. in special cases, however, perhaps.

The approach to providing Behavior Detection has changed. To avoid misleading anyone, the name DeepGuard (for Windows) is not used. How can it be 'silently'?

What exactly are the concerns? Less power in security, less confidentiality in privacy? Or more? Or equal?

So what is happening at F-Secure and with its products? Is it in the process of being purchased and integrated by GenDigital?

For me, such a move or turn would look stupid and sorrowful. It will be sad if this is the case.

But why should this be so?

Some point was highlighted at the time of Avira's acquisition (What changed after Norton acquired Avira? Is my data still safe with F-Secure? - F-Secure Community). How much has it all changed? … SC point? maybe…

And F-Secure also purchases and integrates companies and solutions. WithSecure as well.

Why is F-Secure dropping or abandoning all of its own in-house technologies and replacing them all with Avira components and EPP?

As for me: I am not sure that something is being abandoned or really dropped; I am not sure that own in-house stuff can be replaced with Avira components. Switching to using third-party tools as a basis is possible. And if such a basis does not support compatibility with something already in use, then it is probably easier to replace it with something compatible with the selected basis. Even if it leads to over-simplifying things.

But the mentioned DeepGuard and many other "own in-house technologies" belong to F-Secure in essentially the same way as they belong to WithSecure. Do the changes you describe also apply to WithSecure?

For example, DeepGuard is used by both F-Secure and WithSecure. I think it's difficult and hard to maintain WithSecure DeepGuard and F-Secure DeepGuard and keep them somehow unified. And, especially, across all platforms.

Home users and enterprise users may have different needs and requirements. It is likely that developing technology taking into account only one of the areas may be inconvenient for the second.

How good has DeepGuard been over the past four years and how many improvements, changes, innovations have been made to this technology?

Is (Windows) "replacement" (in F-Secure 'behavior' layer) less effective?! Or you just don’t think Avira's solutions are reliable and good?

What options do current F-Secure subscribers have if they purchased F-Secure, and were fine with the product up until F-Secure decided to switch to Avira components? (If I wanted Avira on my system then I would have purchased Avira; so now that F-Secure is using all Avira technologies, I want at least a pro-rated refund as I do not want Avira on my system.)

I am sure that if they advertised the use of their own technologies (or some specific one, DeepGuard for example) as the main advantage or tried to attract by this, then stopping to use it would be some kind of violation of advertising. But I don't think they did that. All in all, they promised confidentiality and security. if they still can do it with this set-up. so what?!

still.. I don't think that if such changes come before the end of your subscription, they would not consider your requests for a refund (or anything in compromise).

For example, I don't really care about the Avira-part (because I think they have a good level of components). More I'm confused or don't like the "slight" affiliation with GenDigital/Norton. But these are not their "tools" as such.

And I am not sure that "F-Secure is using all Avira technologies" and " F-Secure is using all Avira technologies" claims are perfectly correct. And even no matter how it is there, it is not the same as using Avira. Although the difference in some aspects would be quite vague.

So how about it F-Secure? Is there a leader at F-Secure that will provide a detailed explanation?

but if an official answer appears here, then good.

// when wondering about what's software company up to - it can be helpful to look at their own message (company.f-secure.com/en/join-us), as well as job openings and common sense.

// by the way, I'm also quite sad about not using DeepGuard in 19.9. Always had nice thoughts about DeepGuard (despite frequent mentions of problems with false positives or problems with Steam games; as well as the sometimes overly generic detection approach). As well as general point of sympathy to F-Secure's solutions, designs, technologies, tools, concepts:

Thanks!

Hello,

Thanks for your good response and reasoning with argumentation.

F-Secure has a duty, an obligation, to fully explain what changes are being made so that end users can decide whether or not they can or wish to continue to use the product.

At the moment, there have not been any changes (or their final form) for paid products yet.

Although this can be considered a very conditional point, but nevertheless (everything can change during the beta stage in any direction. This is often why the beta stage of product release occurs).

I share the opinion that if potential changes are introduced into stable solutions (including paid products), then it is quite justified to demand any explanations or clarifications if there are none.

As for legally required documents - well - isn't it easier then to make some kind of official request directly to HQ (so to speak) by paper letter or through a contact who was involved in formalizing official relations (especially if 'changes' breaks agreed terms for using F-Secure consumer solutions). Also, quite likely that if some changes will be not allowed - probably - F-Secure 'before-the-changes' was also disallowed or will be not available with its changed view (instead of implying to use it). If so, then of course they would have to consider such injuries and somehow notify / warn their current supported ares.

As for the rest - I spoke out in my previous comment, to which I could only add - that I would like SC to remain with them, since I, as a user, would like to somehow participate in improving their knowledge directly (and not their partners) .

Thanks and sorry for the discussion. It would be nice if official representatives would respond to you and you would get all the answers to all your questions.

If F-Secure can use more of the 3rd party tools and technology as was alluded to below, to be able to make improvements to other area of the app, that sounds good to me.

At times I get a little bit up in arms with some of the issues (VPN) or changes made, but I still end up in coming back to F-Secure for these 4 main reasons.

1. It is one of the most stable AVs I've used. On Windows PCs I've never had to uninstall and reinstall due to glitches.
2. The protection is right up there with the best of them, including the browser protection for PC. As well as with the Android app and its Chrome protection and the beta Message protection.
3. That we're not inidated with pop up ads for add ons, or beckoned to upgrade in the app itself for features we could get and are "missing". One simple Notification option to disable, which F-Secure honors :)
4. It simply works.

Just my follow up 2 cents worth :)