Poll: *** The All New Windows AV Thread - Keep All AV Questions in Here ***

What AV do you use?

  • Total voters
    812
PapaLazaru said:
So why not change it then?
Click to expand...

I think you mis-understood me, I use because I don't have mess to around or maintain it. I install it and it updates itself and scans all in the back ground without me ever seeing it. I don't get irritating notifications that an update has downloaded or that the latest scan has found nothing.

The only time I see is when it finds something to quarantine etc etc
 
krooton said:
Kaspersky, you can get 3 free licences if you bank with Barclays online.
Click to expand...

I tried that, after using MSE for ages, but Kaspersky made my system so slow that it was painful to use. Even on a SSD. After removing it for MSE all went back to normal.

I use NOD32/Avast Free on the PCs around me and all is good.
 
Last edited:
KIA said:
Bull. Stop misleading people.
Click to expand...

Bull? LOL Yeah sorry, there's me trying to sell the free AV I don't even use to get rich quick. Rather than just plant a one-line ad homien and rely on your prolificity on the forums for credence, why not actually bring some evidence to the table to refute me? There is nothing incorrect about what I said.

The malwaretips forums run a daily virus sweep where approx 250 of the day's newest 0day malware samples are run against the industry's various products. Quihoo and Eset's NOD32 tend to score between 95% and 100% in detection and prevention (i.e. both signature and HIPS based), while the likes of Avast, MSE, Avira and even MalwareBytes tend to score in the 35% to 50% bracket depening on the day.

That's around 1,500 new samples tested every week and the results are pretty consistent across products with the usual expected daily variance. The results are independent and there in black and white - so what exactly is it that's misleading? Anyone can join and see for themselves and I've not stated anything else.

As always a multi-layered approach focusing on prevention is way better than relying on detection. UAC, common sense and non-admin accounts will prevent a lot of common malware. But with the nature of driveby malware (even the BBC has served it in recent times, on legit pages) and especially cross-platform Java exploits (which accounted for up to 60% of infections in the last couple of years according to some sources) it's becoming increasingly important to have good layered defences in place.

HIPS (at least that isn't too chatty and likely to be ignored), sandboxing and behavioural analysis are much more useful than plain detection. As I said this is why the likes of Comodo tend to do very well in real world testing even though historically their signatures haven't been the best. What slips past the sigs tends to be pounded by the HIPS and auto-sandboxing.

If you'd care to point out where I was talking bull and why (preferably with sources and actual evidence) I'm all ears to learn something new. But to refute a simple statement based on malwaretips in-house testing (which was attributed as such) when the results are there in black and white, is perplexing.
 
Rainmaker said:
Quihoo and Eset's NOD32 tend to score between 95% and 100% in detection and prevention
Click to expand...

This is misleading and unrealistic. If you're naive to believe something you read on a forum, keep it to yourself. If only the Iranian's had been running a super dooper Chinese AV solution.

Rainmaker said:
As always a multi-layered approach focusing on prevention is way better than relying on detection. UAC, common sense and non-admin accounts will prevent a lot of common malware.
Click to expand...

This is the useful stuff, along with software patching and browser hardening.
 
KIA said:
This is misleading and unrealistic. If you're naive to believe something you read on a forum, keep it to yourself. If only the Iranian's had been running a super dooper Chinese AV solution.
Click to expand...

Could you be any more patronising while adding absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to the discussion? I don't just read on the forum I contribute to it. You know, with real live malware testing. I believe what I wrote because I also carry out the tests myself and Qihoo is one of the vendors who consistently outperform most others in the area being discussed. Their product is also free and light on resources, and hence one I recommended to the OP.

Stuxnet, and other state-sponsored and highly targeted malware, hardly comes into the equation for an average home user looking to stop script kiddies and Eastern Europeans holding his data to ransom.

I think we'd best leave this here, unless there's anything to actually discuss? I don't see the point in running around the forum putting down anyone who offers their opinion without actually adding anything of value to the thread. I didn't see you jumping on the people recommending MSE, despite its appalling protection/prevention and detection history. So why jump on someone who actually has some real world experience and was offering free advice, on a free forum, about a free product?

I'll let you keep your e-penis, but can we drop the nonsensical ad homien and concentrate on the discussions at hand? If you have any actual data to contribute which backs up your point, I'm all ears (and eyes). But if not let's just leave it here.
 
marc2003 said:
as far as i'm concerned, norton is a virus. i remember using someone's machine where the subscription had ran out and the ****ing thing kept flashing popups in my face telling me to subscribe - the very same behaviour you'd expect from a machine that has been infected. as i didn't have admin rights, i couldn't even stop it.

i've also ran into problems fixing other people's pcs which have had it installed. un-installing it has not been clean and left the internet broken. it took ages trawling google on another pc to fix it.

i would not touch that crap if you paid me let alone expect me to pay for it.
Click to expand...

Agree, it's a hateful program, especially the system security one or whatever they call it now - absolutely killed performance.

I've been using AVG for years and years and used to install it when I did private work and have not once had any virus issues (probably 100+ sites now). There are probably better pieces of software out there (not Norton!) but as far as I'm concerned I'll stick to what I know!
 
Rainmaker said:
Stuxnet, and other state-sponsored and highly targeted malware, hardly comes into the equation for an average home user looking to stop script kiddies and Eastern Europeans holding his data to ransom.
Click to expand...

Yeah, not quite 100% after all. A 13 y/o using a $10 hackforums crypter can make 100% FUD malware.

Rainmaker said:
I don't see the point in running around the forum putting down anyone who offers their opinion without actually adding anything of value to the thread. I didn't see you jumping on the people recommending MSE
Click to expand...

I praise this people because they usually have realistic expectations. MSE doesn't attempt to lul people into a false sense of security. MSE isn't a cash generating tool. MSE doesn't contain a ton of bloatware. [/QUOTE]
 
KIA said:
Yeah, not quite 100% after all. A 13 y/o using a $10 hackforums crypter can make 100% FUD malware.



I praise this people because they usually have realistic expectations. MSE doesn't attempt to lul people into a false sense of security. MSE isn't a cash generating tool. MSE doesn't contain a ton of bloatware.
Click to expand...

I honestly think you've misread or misinterpreted what I wrote. I never once said it catches 100% of malware. Such a suggestion would be laughable, and now I think I see why you've reacted how you have? I said in in-house testing with others on malwaretips, the app (and Eset NOD32) consistently detects between 95% and 100% of that day's samples. Big difference.

As for false sense of security, cash generation and bloat I'm not sure where that ties into Qihoo. It's lean as anything, completely free, doesn't nag for upgrades (like Avast, AVG and Avira, for example) and the only 'tools' it has added are a auto sandbox and USB scanning. Hardly bloat.

So again I stand by what I said, and the recommendation for Qihoo 360 over the likes of MSE and Avast based on real world results. Nothing can catch 100% of anything, as you're more than aware, which is where the other factors and layers come into play as we've already discussed. For free Qihoo 360 is my choice every time as it's great at catching PUPs, ransomware and fake AVs etc - which is where a lot of the other vendors fall completely flat. Eset NOD32, Kaspersky and F-Secure are decent too but obviously cost money. Cheers.
 
Last edited:
kefan77 said:
I tried that, after using MSE for ages, but Kaspersky made my system so slow that it was painful to use. Even on a SSD. After removing it for MSE all went back to normal.
Click to expand...

I had the free 3 licence's from Barclays as well. Like you, i found it slowed the system down even on an SSD. It is an AV and firewall combined, that's why it slowed everything up. During a fresh install of Win7 i installed the standalone AV from Kaspersky insted. The difference in speed is substantial. So if you have no need for a software firewall, just install the standalone AV. Of course, Barclays don't supply the AV free, only the complete suite.
 
kefan77 said:
that's not a great AV then...
Click to expand...

All AV's that I'm aware of will inform you when malicious files are intercepted and depending on how the software is configured will let you know what has been done with the file i.e Quarantined, deleted ..etc


As for system/performance impact and software footprint this will also depend on whether the person installing the software knows what they are doing and configured/setup accordingly!!

Most AV's will install with the highest/safest settings as default (i.e Scan ALL accessed files plus regular full HDD scans:rolleyes: )
These options are a waste of clock cycles and perform unnecessary read/writes to your SSD or hard drives and offer very little if any extra protection!
Provided you have installed and configured the A.V properly then Modified (Scan on create) / Scan when a file is Modified can be selected to prevent the AV from scanning all your programs and files for the hundredth time :p
The AV will only scan NEW files that are introduced to your system which will obviously significantly reduce it's overall performance impact on your system :-)

This is how I've configured my Symantec Corp. AV for over a decade and I've never caught a virus (intercepted a bucket-load mind and that doesn't include the false-positive keygens:p )
 
Last edited:
Well what about security suite? Normally I pick NOD32 or AVIRA and AVG can be ok. Now Lately AVG arent as good. Norton are MUCH better than theywere but still.....


Ok consider this:

Want a good Firewall and anti spam (AS good with thunderbird?) maybe any other mad little features.

I like stolen laptops and Nod32s special account thingy. So this I install I will use on l;aptop and server and mobile. Gaming is one too so small footprint.

BitDefender, Fsecure Sop

I use a lot of Server-side stuff on here and VPN too.

Bit Def IMMA try. PeerGuarden too
 
New version of Avast 2014 (build 9.0.2016) released!


We're introducing several important pieces in this release:

* Stream Filtering -- fixed stability and compatibility issues, it's running smooth and fast now, so no more browsing problems :-)

* ARA/ARC -- implemented internal architecture improvements, if you can, please test these components, thanks a lot

* Firewall -- the firewall should be more stable and with better compatibility with other network applications

* Improved! Software Updater – new installation wizard lets you download and install multiple updates at once directly from download.com

* Improved! Browser Cleanup – improved detection and removal of browser protectors, those tools that try to block us from getting rid of annoying toolbars

* Improved! GrimeFighter – now supporting 12 additional languages and with an advanced console for more control of optimization tasks. Go ahead and fight the Grime!

Download locations
http://files.avast.com/iavs9x/avast_free_antivirus_setup.exe
http://files.avast.com/iavs9x/avast_pro_antivirus_setup.exe
http://files.avast.com/iavs9x/avast_internet_security_setup.exe
http://files.avast.com/iavs9x/avast_premier_antivirus_setup.exe

avast! cleaner:
http://files.avast.com/iavs9x/avastclear.exe

It should be possible to install this version on top of your existing avast! installation (all settings should be preserved).

Any feedback is appreciated! https://feedback.avast.com/response/add

thanks a lot,
Pavel
Click to expand...
 
Since I've started using BitDefender Free I've not noticed my EXE directory where I keep downloaded installers, software backups and things loads a lot faster. MSE used to scan every executable and take ages loading the directory.

BitDefender is also slicker, smaller and simpler to install and let it do its thing. It's even found on its automated scans bundled nuisanceware (toolbars etc) that are included in some installers as optional items that MSE never bothered to notify of. Knowing stuff like that is at least being detected is peace of mind even if I already know those installers h ave them (hence why we here always use custom install options not the default which installs those nuisances :p).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom