nod32

Richdog · 22 Jan 2006 at 13:33

In my experience Norton is for people who don't know much about AV software, and accept it as the mass-marketed, "standard" anti-virus that it is, simply because they don't know any better. Detection rate is't up to par any more and it's so resource heavy your computer will hate you forever.

I took out a NOD32 subscription about 2 months ago after getting fed up with long boot times from Panda Platinum 2006 (one of the best engines out there, just a resource hog) and the difference has completely blown me away. The installation made little noticeable difference to boot/shut-down times and system responsiveness, so much so that I was admittedly a bit stunned when comparing it to previous packages i'd had installed.

Detection rate is as good as Panda and a shade behind Kapersky and a full system scan takes no time at all.

In short, unless some other AV arrives on the scene with some miraculous new features, NOD32 is staying on my system for the forseeable future. Absolutely stonking AV package, 9.5/10 an only losing half a point because it doesn't do spyware

.

Gman · 22 Jan 2006 at 16:18

Richdog said:
Detection rate is as good as Panda and a shade behind Kapersky and a full system scan takes no time at all.

umm you say that NOD32 is slightly behind Kapersky yet you prefer NOD32 , any reasons ?

Dennisthemenace · 22 Jan 2006 at 16:45

The reason i'm not into NOD32 is the licence agreement.

In accepting this agreement, You are acknowledging that by enabling this reporting feature, You are agreeing to allow the computer and/or platform on which the Licensed Program is installed to send this information to Licensor, to allow Licensor to collect such information and to share this information with trusted third parties.

I will never trust any protection software that snoops my entire system so it can pass that information on whoever they feel like. It's called spyware. It's beyond contempt.

Richdog · 22 Jan 2006 at 17:09

Gman said:
umm you say that NOD32 is slightly behind Kapersky yet you prefer NOD32 , any reasons ?

Yup, scanning speed and resources it takes. Besides the difference between it and kapersky as far as detection rates go are negligible, not worth worrying about in the slightest.

Gman · 22 Jan 2006 at 22:45

Richdog said:
Yup, scanning speed and resources it takes. Besides the difference between it and kapersky as far as detection rates go are negligible, not worth worrying about in the slightest.

I used to have nod on the pc then changed. After I changed I noticed a slight decrease in the boot times. Now this wasn't a huge difference only a few secconds at most.

You haven't noticed that at all have you ?

Richdog · 22 Jan 2006 at 22:46

Can't say I have, what did you change to?

Dennisthemenace · 23 Jan 2006 at 00:30

surely, every virus checker will add to the time of a bootup.

Richdog · 23 Jan 2006 at 07:25

Dennisthemenace said:
surely, every virus checker will add to the time of a bootup.

Surely it will, but with varying degrees of noticeability (that a word?), and with all the other stuff I have running it's really hard to tell... all I know is that it is significantly quicker than any other A software I have tried.

Dennisthemenace · 23 Jan 2006 at 10:19

Did you also know that to install NOD you had to agree to them stealing personal information, and passing it on to third parties?

Richdog · 23 Jan 2006 at 11:35

I can't say it particularly bothers me, I have nothing of interest to them. What information do they collect anyway?

Dennisthemenace · 23 Jan 2006 at 12:20

Richdog said:
I can't say it particularly bothers me, I have nothing of
interest to them. What information do they collect anyway?

Hit the link below and go to post eight

Post 8 in the thread

Richdog · 23 Jan 2006 at 15:03

Hmm I think if it were of such a shady nature that it would habe been exposed by now, surely? I'll ring them in the next couple of days and ask exactly what it means.

Dennisthemenace · 23 Jan 2006 at 15:06

Richdog said:
Hmm I think if it were of such a shady nature that it would habe been exposed by now, surely? I'll ring them in the next couple of days and ask exactly what it means.

Ask them what role stealing personal information and passing it to third parties has to do with protecting your system, and post the answer.

Caged · 23 Jan 2006 at 15:17

You posted:

In accepting this agreement, You are acknowledging that by enabling this reporting feature, You are agreeing to allow the computer and/or platform on which the Licensed Program is installed to send this information to Licensor, to allow Licensor to collect such information and to share this information with trusted third parties.

Which refers to enabling a virus reporting feature. It's kind of understandable that it involves sending data. I really doubt they are grabbing personal data off you on purpose, they are just saying it to cover your ass in case a virus appears in a file which also contains your address book or something, and the memory dump they send might contain bits of that. If they were going to go all out to get your details, they could just pull them from the registration page.

You can remove the tin foil hat now.

Dennisthemenace · 23 Jan 2006 at 15:36

And passing that personal data to a third party?

You may use your brain now

SiriusB · 23 Jan 2006 at 16:18

Disable the reporting feature. Jobs a gooden.

SiriusB

Richdog · 23 Jan 2006 at 16:30

Caged said:
You can remove the tin foil hat now.

I was thinking it... but didn't say it.

Dennisthemenace · 24 Jan 2006 at 09:03

Richdog said:
I was thinking it... but didn't say it.

On my computer I have Microsoft Outlook containing every detail of my life, past present, and future. I have an access database containing extensive medical records. I have Excel spreadsheets that contains extensive financial information. There are people within this forum that use their computers for work, some of them will be linked to a company network. The forum is full of people building computers as a business, and most will have a database of customer and VAT records. Not many of them would have known that by installing NOD32 they have given Eset the legal right to use NOD32 to upload stuff out of their system, and farm the information out to other companies and people.

I hope you evolve enough to recognise the problem soon.

Richdog · 24 Jan 2006 at 09:55

Dennisthemenace said:
I hope you evolve enough to recognise the problem soon.

lol @ people on internet forums that say things like "I hope you evolve enough", I wonder if some people actually realise how ridiculous they sound.

Oh and by the way if you have all of your very sensitive personal medical/financial records on your computer I hope they are all in password encrypted folders, right? Because NOD32's privacy policy is the least of your worries, if people want to get info from your computer it can be done far more maliciously and it is all still at risk. ALL of my delicate personal info is encrypted to hell and back because now I work for a major antivirus company i've learnt that you're never really safe and that leaving information such as that open in drives is a bad idea.

Only leave stuff unprotected that you would share on the internet anyway so if anyone does get hold of it, it's no big deal..

Dennisthemenace · 24 Jan 2006 at 11:34

Richdog said:
I was thinking it... but didn't say it.

It was a defensive remark to an intended insult

With a little intelligence you would know that people who use their computer databases as part of a business cannot always encrypt it. It would require decrypting every time someone came through the door or phoned in an order. Protection is a well written program tested to distruction with a decent source code and password.

You may have no problem with having your computer burgled, those of us that use it for more than playing freecell would call it a very big deal.

Your claim to work for an anti virus softwarehouse is something i find very hard to swallow.