anti virus recommendations

[lowrider69]

Thread continues.

AV Comparatives has Avira and Avast much closer in detection rates, Avast 98.4%, Avira 97.5%.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_od_feb2011.pdf

Scroll down page to page 9. They ran the test with Avast 5.1. Avast had more false positives this time around which is not common.

By the way, AV Comparatives is completely free. No subscriptions needed.

 

[MustISO]

Here's results from another company:
http://www.av-test.org/certifications

Wasn't too happy with how Avast and MSE did on that report.

 

[thescreensavers]

Here's results from another company:
http://www.av-test.org/certifications

Wasn't too happy with how Avast and MSE did on that report.

That website does not explain stuff, sure every site has different testing methods but in the Avira test "Average slow down" 138sec how do they test that?

What does "real-world 0-Day attack testing" Were do they get their samples?

I don't like their testing and how they display it.


av comparatives and VB100 are at least are similar

 

[Mem]

Here's results from another company:
http://www.av-test.org/certifications

Wasn't too happy with how Avast and MSE did on that report.

I guess you missed my first post http://www.avast.com/en-gb/pr-avast-free-antivirus-wins-12th-straight-vb100-award?p_pro=0&p_vep=6&p_ves=0&p_lqa=0&p_lsu=24&p_lst=0&p_lex=241&p_lng=en&p_lid=en-gb&p_elm=6&p_var=.%252Ffa%252Fen-gb%252Fonline-news-default.html&utm_campaign=News_Service&utm_source=prg_fav_60_0&utm_medium=prg_ban_news&utm_content=en-gb_online_news ,

“We saw some stomping good scores, highly impressive in all sets. The WildList and clean sets were handled without a glitch, earning AVAST another VB100 award for its free product,” wrote John Hawes in his review in the Virus Bulletin. “The company boasts an impeccable 12 out of 12 record in the last two years of our comparatives.”

avast! caught all 100% of the In-the-wild viruses and scored a 98.94% on total detection. avast! also had a high score in proactive detection which tests the ability of an antivirus program to identify unknown viruses without a specific malware signature. Proactive detection shows the ability of avast! Free Antivirus to offer multilayer protection and technologies that go far beyond the simple signature detection of traditional programs.

Also notice the ram usage in the graph ,what more do you want from a free AV,a Bulldozer CPU ?.

I'll say I also use free version of Malwarebytes Anti-Malware as well for backup plus common sense,that goes a long way,just remember no AV can be 100% foolproof due to new viruses/trojans coming out all the time plus it takes time for companies to update their AV DAT files etc ..not to meantion one of the weakest links ie the user.

 

[Emulex]

unless you have 100% you best just have a good backup policy in place. there's going to be 100's of 0-days nobody knows about if you use adobe flash/reader/java/etc. even if they have 0-day protection mutating droppers can still be very effective.

false positives that delete your critical system files - now that's a real pisser. i've heard of file affected by bad updates taking out 100's of machines. can you imagine the pain that must have caused some folks. esp if it was 100 road warrior's with laptops up in the air?

 

[lowrider69]

I agree a backup plan is a must.

False positives or flaky definition updates flagging system files has happened to several different programs over the years.

 

[lxskllr]

I agree a backup plan is a must.

False positives or flaky definition updates flagging system files has happened to several different programs over the years.

I set the default action of my A/V to notify, and log. That way I can go through the results, and make my own determination.

 

[lowrider69]

I set the default action of my A/V to notify, and log. That way I can go through the results, and make my own determination.

Same here.

 

[phantom404]

I'll probably get shot for this but I just recently ditched Vipre for Norton IS 2k11. Man has it came along way. Not a system hog like it used to be. I'm very pleased with it. Got it at cheapantivirus.com for around 20 bucks.

 

[Cannyone]

I've tried several of them over the last few years... NOD32, which I preferred in the past, dropped the ball. It let a serious malware infection take place on a customer's system. And ESET wouldn't do anything to help us out. I tried Panda and Kaspersky, and they were both far to intrusive and restrictive. Then I tried Microsoft Security Essentials.

Now I notice that at least one person here says that MSE "sucks". But that's an unqualified statement (as in ... Why does MSE "suck"?) from someone who most likely just hates Microsoft. It does request that you do a scan every few weeks. But that's not really very intrusive. And there are regular updates. Plus it doesn't seem to take up that many resources (though my system wouldn't be too bogged down if it did...). The only other factor is that it requires an Authentic copy of Windows which has been activated. Which is never going to be an Issue for me.

Oh and its "Free".

So... MSE +1

 

[Steltek]

I've tried several of them over the last few years... NOD32, which I preferred in the past, dropped the ball. It let a serious malware infection take place on a customer's system. And ESET wouldn't do anything to help us out. I tried Panda and Kaspersky, and they were both far to intrusive and restrictive. Then I tried Microsoft Security Essentials.

Now I notice that at least one person here says that MSE "sucks". But that's an unqualified statement (as in ... Why does MSE "suck"?) from someone who most likely just hates Microsoft. It does request that you do a scan every few weeks. But that's not really very intrusive. And there are regular updates. Plus it doesn't seem to take up that many resources (though my system wouldn't be too bogged down if it did...). The only other factor is that it requires an Authentic copy of Windows which has been activated. Which is never going to be an Issue for me.

Oh and its "Free".

So... MSE +1

I don't think that it sucks. However, it does have issues (granted, not unique ones, which are shared with many other AV packages) over preventing malware infections from drive-by downloads.

I used to stick it on everybody's machines I worked on, but I've been seeing a lot of those folks come back to me with the fake AV and rootkit infections picked up via "drive-by" downloads that MSE isn't preventing and can't cure. Now granted, a lot of this problem is related to the web surfing habits of these folks -- obviously, they are going places they shouldn't be and educating them obviously doesn't seem to make a difference. It probably wouldn't matter what AV was installed, as they'd probably still find some way of getting an infection.

However, it does seem to me that Avast's web shield system seems to work just a little better than MSE, especially in combination with a paid copy of Malwarebytes Anti-malware or SuperAntiSpyware for web blocking. I'm even beginning to think about adding Sandboxie to the mix for a few of my really stupid morons the next time I see them.

MSE is a young product, and I'm sure it will vastly improve over time. But I'm definitely backing off on it for now to give it time to mature.

 

[nemesismk2]

Microsoft Security Essentials

 

[Pardus]

Comodo AV. Free and it works great.

 

[Emulex]

mse sucks because its based on the free scheduler. nobody i've to date knows how to make it run continuously until completion when a skipped event takes place like every other antivirus can do.

 

[catilley1092]

I'm currently using ESET NOD32 with no negative issues to report. Prior to ESET, I used MSE for a long time. My old (now deceased) notebook caught a very nasty infection that MSE should have intercepted. The thing was, I'm a subscriber to many of MS's newsletters, as well as a TechNet member, and was warned of the bug, yet MSE didn't catch it.



And couldn't even clean it, even from the partition beside of it (XP Pro). So I relied on a recent backup to fix things. Then I started using the ESET Online Scanner (a free app) to check behind MSE, all kinds of trash was found, some old, some recent. I can't, in good faith, recommend MSE to anyone.

If one can't afford a paid AV, then both Avast & Comodo offers excellent solutions. Comodo even offers an entire suite (AV & Firewall), as well as a free backup program. But Comodo uses more RAM than Avast does.

If it weren't for the promo for ESET that I bought from Newegg ($29.99 for a 3 user pack), I'd have went back to Avast, but would've went Pro. I use it on Win 2K, they offered me the same deal, but ESET impressed me enough to give it a shot.

It's currently protecting 2 installs of Win 7 Pro, and scans by MBAM & SAS turns up clean.

Cat

 

[Zorander]

One more vote for Avira Antivir. I switched to Avira from AVG a few years back and couldn't have been happier with it.

 

[lowrider69]

It's refreshing to see people criticize MSE here. I have installed it, used it, messed around with it and wasn't knocked out by it. I have used it on client machines but I have since recommended other alternatives. One [f]orum in particular is full of MSE fans who just repeat "MSE ftw" like drones in every post. Anything created by MS can't be criticized, it's the best and is perfect.

 

[catilley1092]

MSE may well be system friendly than some others, but I would never use it again. Avast is far better.

Also, Ad-Aware is worth mentioning, I run it on a couple of VM's, it does good. Ran both the ESET & F-Secure Online Scanners behind it, everything was clean.

Cat

 

[hclarkjr]

i was taught long time ago that you get what you pay for. going with something that is free is going to have it's risks involved.

 

[JimKiler]

It's refreshing to see people criticize MSE here. I have installed it, used it, messed around with it and wasn't knocked out by it. I have used it on client machines but I have since recommended other alternatives. One [f]orum in particular is full of MSE fans who just repeat "MSE ftw" like drones in every post. Anything created by MS can't be criticized, it's the best and is perfect.

Yes it is nice to see the last few posts with valid reasons for disliking MSE.

How come nobody is recommending Symantec? (seriously don't answer that)

 

[mod81]

Agreed Avira is very good and free or you can pay a little extra for the full version which won't periodlically nag you to buy.

If you can get a hold of it then sophos is a very good AV package but they mainly available for large corps than small business.

 

[WildHorse]

.





.

 

[gsaldivar]

i was taught long time ago that you get what you pay for. going with something that is free is going to have it's risks involved.

As comfortable as that maxim seems, it is quite often proven wrong...

There are many free software products, especially in computing, that meet or exceed their commercial counterparts both in performance and features.

Every product - whether commercial or free, has its benefits and drawbacks. Just because something is free doesn't necessarily mean those drawbacks will be dealbreakers for all users.

 

[classy]

It's refreshing to see people criticize MSE here. I have installed it, used it, messed around with it and wasn't knocked out by it. I have used it on client machines but I have since recommended other alternatives. One [f]orum in particular is full of MSE fans who just repeat "MSE ftw" like drones in every post. Anything created by MS can't be criticized, it's the best and is perfect.

That is just a stupid statement. MSE is a decent anti-virus program and has consistently been slightly better than many of the other free programs. Its light on resources too. All of the free virus programs have good things about them and some not so good things. If your buying, than I think Norton or Kapersky are among the best for single. For networks I stand by Norton as an admin. Just solid admin tools over the others and top notch detection and cleaning too.

Antivirus is a forever changing landscape. Each year some do better than others, but Norton and Kapersky remain top notch year in and year out. As for free, I do give the nod to MSE, with defender running, and UAC on a windows 7 box. Its clean and unobtrusive. UAC is annoying but it will stop most changes without your knowledge. Nothing beats Malwarebytes for cleaning up malware.

 

[lowrider69]

That is just a stupid statement. MSE is a decent anti-virus program and has consistently been slightly better than many of the other free programs. Its light on resources too. All of the free virus programs have good things about them and some not so good things.

What is stupid about my statement? IMO it is refreshing to see people criticize MSE. It has decent detection rates, although it's detection rate sucked in the Feb AV Comparatives report, it's a slow scanner and it's not that lightweight. Mainly I got tired of reading a certain [f]orum where everybody treated it like gold and if you had anything negative to say about it there would be a 15 page debate by the MSE drones. But that's off topic frankly and I don't want to derail the thread.