Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Panda Security Adaptive Defense.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
The gap between the two final conclusions is a problem, whether or not a file is known to be malware or is known to be safe. There is a gap between this space which means that some time in which the attestation service works on the conclusion it might regenerate this gap through the communication process. For example, if an employee gets his laptop and goes somewhere where it doesn't have full access to Panda Cloud, meaning the attestation service in the Panda Cloud, it will lose the connection and it cannot promptly receive the attestation conclusion. If you travel or something like that or there's a lapse in time in which the lack of the conclusion regarding a required item like a file or process or whatever, is lacking. Panda understood it might be a huge problem for the whole solution. They resolved it in a way that I don't like. They assumed that there is a knowledgeable person in the customer security team that will assume the conclusion and will either set that everything is supposed to be malware or everything is supposed to be safe, unless it's attested by the Panda Cloud. There are just these two options. You have a checkbox and you just check or uncheck the checkbox, meaning you assume that the non-attested item is assumed to be malware. If you put the checkmark, it is assumed to be safe. Either conclusion means we will have either false positives or false negatives. This is an issue they didn’t solve well. They didn't solve this issue well first of all because it is only a single checkbox to do this. As a suggestion, they could use several similar checkboxes, for example, one for executable files, one for malware detections or suspicions, and so on. You either treat unattested items as malware or either as safe items, which is not good.
The Linux installation is performed on the command line and they need a package installer for that operating system.
Improvements could be made in terms of how the reporting is structured.
The product can improve in several ways. I think the most important improvement would be in the area of modification. They have add-ons that can be used to add functionality to the base package like encryption or patch management. But they could do much more to improve the catalog of modifications and offer more. My impression is that they only have a few options. I'm not sure if they have an iOS version. I know that they have an Android version. But they could be improving and expanding the product options much more to make it more universal and with more capability.
What I like about this product is the pitching and versioning of the application itself and I would like to use it for the documents and the public protection. I would like to see better data protection, for instance using fingerprints to log in.