Camtasia For Linux

[Maggie Szydlowski]

HeyLook Im on RH Oracle Linux 6 x86_64 I need to record both the screen video, a webcam and the audio from an USB mic. I used to do it with Win 81 and camtasia but I had to switch to bare metal install etc My webcam driver works fine (I'm impressed BTW) so I only need the Linux tool .. any clues or ideas? best regards

Look I need to video record with audio and webcam the procedures Im following to config my development environment for a deliverable for our customer . On the old VMS days I used to do all the stuff on the virtual machines and record from windows and so on ... now and because I need all the power from my laptop ASUSG750JX I installed on bare metal and its looking good enough, I'm advancing very fast BTW

Hi,Here goes:I'm entirely new to wireshark but have a fair share of networking knowledge / understanding.Using a mixed network of mac and windows machines and a couple of raspi and linux boxes (synology and proxmox) I am now in the process of following a couple of online courses.Most of these video's are available for download, but a couple of them, used as a kind of getting started video's are not available for download.

Is there a way to use wireshark to detect this videostream and then capture the complete video?I know there's ways to record the audio + the image on the monitor (OBS, Camtasia and Screenflow amongst others) but I would prefer to capture the videostream directly.

So to be clear, this has nothing to do with capturing wireshark's own packages but capturing playing video of some app.As a side note, the video is not playing in any "video player" software such as VLC or media player.

Bear in mind the traffic may be encrypted and if you don't know what application is "playing" the video, then you don't stand much of a chance getting the keying material from it to do the decryption.

Well in short, as per the information that I had received earlier from the community forum administrator, the market margin for linux is still less as compared to mac and windows, hence bitdefender discontinued the linux version for home user.

In my case, I paid for the family protection and some of my devices are in Linux desktop, so I couldn't protect all, but at least I've been happy with its performance in the rest of the devices so far.

Well since bitdefender does not have a linux product for home user, you can either go with kaspersky or eset. I would prefer eset since it has excellent detection when it comes to detecting linux malware.

I made an account just now just to say that I think this is really dumb. Bitdefender protects Linux by way of the business endpoint solutions (i.e., GravityZone). Honestly considering changing to using that since the prices are fairly similar depending on your license needs.

What kills me is that Bitdefender makes the solution, but then can't be bothered to sell/offer it for home users because it's "too much work for the market share". All they have to do is offer options for the major distros (Ubuntu/Debian, Fedora/RHEL, anything else that has a server and desktop version). I've used Bitdefender for years on my Windows and Android devices, but now that I'm starting to get into using Linux devices Bitdefender is becoming less appealing because it no longer meets my needs.

In the past, Bitdefender did have antimalware for Linux for home users. Also, there have been many feature requests related to Bitdefender to reintroduce the Linux version for home users. However, according to Bitdefender, due to the smaller number of Linux users compared to Windows and Mac, they currently do not plan to reintroduce the Linux version for home users. The Linux version will currently only be offered to business/enterprise users.

I would like to add my voice to this request. I am on the cusp of needing to renew my Bitdefender Home subscription (10 devices) and what always holds me back is the lack of support for Linux. I always end up going in search of something that has Linux support. Come-on Bitdefender, how much extra work could it be to add Linux support for the major Linux Distributions (Debian\Ubuntu, Red Hat\Fedora, etc).

The new update to this post: I got in touch with the Bitdefender support, who further got in touch with Bitdefender developers, and below is what they currently think about Linux antimalware for home users.

I would advise anyone looking for a desktop Linux antivirus solution to check out Dr. Web or eScan. These are the only two companies that seem to care about supporting the Linux desktop community. I have used both of them on Linux and both are excellent. (They are both certainly much better than clam.)

Dr. Web has the convenience of a web portal where a user can add or suspend licenses at any time without having to pay for a whole year up front. It's very convenient. You just keep funds in your Dr. Web online account, and they deduct a certain amount each day depending on the number of licenses that you have active. Of course, they also have products for Windows, Mac, Android that can be managed through the same web portal. The web site is a bit confusing as they also have a standalone product that can be purchased with the more traditional one or two-year license. Just look for the tab or option that says 'Subscriptions' and that should put you on the right track. The only thing that might give someone pause about Dr. Web at the current time is that it's a Russian product, and the government may decide to ban it like they recently did with Kaspersky. drweb dot com is the web site.

eScan is also good value for Linux. The price is usually $20 per year for Linux desktop protection, and the software has quite a few options. There is no web management portal like Dr. Web, so you have to purchase a separate license for each machine directly from the web site. eScan is produced by an Indian company named Microworld, but they do have offices in the U.S. They also have products for Windows, Mac, and Android as well, and they are a Microsoft Partner company. The Android version didn't seem to be as polished as the Linux and Window versions, but it was certainly functional. escanav dot com is the web site.

I have tested both products on Linux machines and the real-time components of both have actually alerted me to actual threats on Linux, although they have all been relatively minor risks. Dr. Web seems to be the better value in terms of cost because they give free mobile protection for one device for each desktop device license. So basically, Android protection is free for an equal number of devices as the number of desktops.

I have really gotten tired of the same old answer from the major antivirus companies about not wanting to support Linux on the desktop, especially when Linux desktop systems continue to grow. I certainly hope that since Bitdefender does not want to be bothered with Linux customers that they will allow this message to remain for customers that are genuinely searching for Linux malware solutions.

I researched both of these options and neither feels a good choice. For starters, if you're concerned about geo-political issues Dr. Web is a red flag (like Kaspersky). Not trying to imply Dr. Web is state-backed, but it is an unknown being based in Russia. eScan has mixed results. Neither have results from AV-Test (they both offer Windows solutions so you'd assume their'd be something).

eScan relies solely on Bitdefender's signature-based engine for malware detection. This engine is developed by malware researchers and allows eScan to leverage Bitdefender's extensive malware database and detection capabilities without needing to build its own detection engine from scratch.

Talking about Dr. Web, it has a reputation for having one of the lowest malware detection rates across various operating systems. This is particularly concerning when it comes to ransomware, a type of malware that can encrypt files and demand payment for their release. Given the severe consequences of a ransomware infection, Dr. Web's poor detection rates in this area raise significant concerns about its effectiveness in protecting users.

I'd say let's not jump to conclusions yet. The Linux version has been brought up on numerous occassions in the community and beyond, so it's safe to say that the developers now have an invaluable amount of feedback to analyze, in order to decide if this avenue should be explored further. I know this because I have forwarded many user testimonials and requests to them, and I can assure you they are actively doing research on this matter.

If there will be a product for Linux home users this remains to be seen. My question to you @tech101us & @themet4lgod is how do you use Linux exactly and what is your need for security on this OS, if there is a specific need, that is?

Dr. Web does not participate in the industry-recognized AV tests. They stopped participating several years ago, long before the current geo-political events. They stated that they don't believe the tests reflect real-world scenarios and that the tests are misleading. Take that for what you will. I can only say that I've had good results with Dr. Web on both Linux and Windows, and the protection appears to be at least on par with the lesser-used major antivirus products (e.g. McAfee, Trend Micro).

I can't really comment on the ransomware effectiveness because of I've never been a victim of ransomware. It may well not be as effective as other products, but it's certainly better than using clam or nothing at all when it comes to Linux systems. On Windows, there's always Windows Defender as a default.

I've been using Dr. Web on all of my devices for about three years with no problems. This includes two Linux desktops, one Windows desktop, and three Android devices. Still, I can understand people's apprehension with it being a Russian product during the current geo-political situation.

In terms of Dr. Web's Android product, I feel it is second to none, having more features than any of the Android products that I have previously used, including BitDefender. The anti-theft component is especially powerful, and I've even used it to recover my lost phone on one occasion. Something else that's worth mentioning is that Dr. Web actually detected and blocked an app on my phone that was automatically downloaded from the Google Play Store during an update. Apparently, the update for my home alarm system app was infected with spyware, and Dr. Web quarantined it. The following day Google released a second update for the same app that Dr. Web then reported to be okay.

3a8082e126