# Best anti-virus.



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 22, 2010)

I vote avast, but I am a HUGE avast fan. I site that to it's good detection rates. GMER anti-rootkit and boot time scan. Avast 5 is even more awesome now. It's also free. 

I could go into more detail, but most of you already have your opinions.

IMHO Good ones
Avast
Avira (Paid for version)
Nod32 (_very _light. 
G-data

IMHO Bad ones
Norton
Mcafee
Kaspersky (It ran shitty on my computer, I think it's to advanced for most users, for fast comps with computer security majors it's as good as you'll get.)


----------



## Lucy Bones (Feb 22, 2010)

Norton, McAfee, and Avast are the worst. They piss me off so much.

I use AVG.


----------



## Ratche (Feb 22, 2010)

Yepper, used McAfee and Norton for a long time, but then I started using AVG...hell of a lot better, but thats my personal opinion.


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 22, 2010)

Ahkmill said:


> Norton, McAfee, and Avast are the worst. They piss me off so much.
> 
> I use AVG.




Ohh boy, 

http://www.av-comparatives.org/

Sorry buddy, AVG is consistently a horrible contender on AV comparatives. 

Why is avast bad?


----------



## pheonix (Feb 22, 2010)

I use Avira so I voted as such.


----------



## Runefox (Feb 22, 2010)

Ahkmill said:


> Norton, McAfee, and Avast are the worst.


Granted on Norton and McAfee, but why Avast? Is it the UI? If so, they've totally revamped it and it's a lot, *lot* better. It's also a lot lighter than any other AV I've ever used, taking up <10MB of RAM at any given period of time and consisting of two processes (the service and the UI). Very unobtrusive, very fast, very efficient. It's my weapon of choice.

AVG used to be my choice, but since they jumped to 8, it's been slipping down a slippery slope of bloat. In addition, some of its features have caused issues with sites on the internet (SafeSearch and so on hit a site every time it scans a link), and AVG9 had many issues, including not properly upgrading its Outlook/Exchange plugin (causing Outlook/Exchange to die altogether), stealing focus every 30 seconds, and so on. The devs have been very lazy about fixing these issues, and it doesn't inspire confidence for the future.

Norton 2009/10 actually are fairly good as a standalone AV; Add in Internet Security, however, and you've got problems again.

McAfee has always been a bloated mess and totally ineffective, even back in the Win9x days. That's about all I've got to say on the matter.

I've had differing experiences with NOD32; NOD32 as of about a year or two ago was definitely not light; Quite the opposite, though much lighter than the likes of McAfee and the Norton of the day. TrendMicro used to be pretty good, but last I checked, it was on its way to McAfee-esque bloat.

Can't say anything about Kaspersky or Avira - I've had machines come in with Avira rife with viruses and malware, but the same can really be said for any case of PEBKAC.


----------



## Yaps (Feb 22, 2010)

AVG Free Edition I think is doing a pretty good job. Plus it is free!


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 22, 2010)

Runefox said:


> Granted on Norton and McAfee, but why Avast? Is it the UI? If so, they've totally revamped it and it's a lot, *lot* better. It's also a lot lighter than any other AV I've ever used, taking up <10MB of RAM at any given period of time and consisting of two processes (the service and the UI). Very unobtrusive, very fast, very efficient. It's my weapon of choice.
> 
> AVG used to be my choice, but since they jumped to 8, it's been slipping down a slippery slope of bloat. In addition, some of its features have caused issues with sites on the internet (SafeSearch and so on hit a site every time it scans a link), and AVG9 had many issues, including not properly upgrading its Outlook/Exchange plugin (causing Outlook/Exchange to die altogether), stealing focus every 30 seconds, and so on. The devs have been very lazy about fixing these issues, and it doesn't inspire confidence for the future.
> 
> ...



Ahh someone knowledgeable. I'd love to talk to you more about this stuff, I'm really interested in getting a job in computer security. 

Yes, I totally agree about avast. AVG was good around 7.5, but it did start to die around 8.5


----------



## Willow (Feb 22, 2010)

A free trial of Norton came with the purchase of my computer...I was offered an anti-virus by Best Buy (the place where I bought the computer) but at the time, I didn't know the total cost of my computer...

So I just used the free trial of Norton and to back it up so that way I'd still be protected once Norton went, I downloaded the basic AVG...

My computer comes with a few anti-virus things of its own..like the malware detector, which will come in handy later on...


----------



## Runefox (Feb 22, 2010)

WillowWulf said:


> So I just used the free trial of Norton and to back it up so that way I'd still be protected once Norton went, I downloaded the basic AVG...



If Norton is still on your computer, you're probably losing a bit of performance to it even though its trial's expired. You should download the Norton Removal Tool from Symantec (the guys who make Norton) to be sure you're rid of it.



> My computer comes with a few anti-virus things of its own..like the malware detector, which will come in handy later on...



Just out of curiosity, what are they? Usually if they come with a computer, you're going to be running into free trials and pay-to-clean stuff. You should take a look at Spybot: Search & Destroy and Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware instead; They're free, and pretty much what the professionals are using to remove malware on an infected computer (don't buy into most of the commercial stuff; Most of the best utilities are actually free).

Of course, the shop I used to work at pre-installed these (and other software, like OpenOffice.org and Mozilla Firefox) on new machines and left them on repaired ones.


----------



## ToeClaws (Feb 23, 2010)

On Window's partitions, I use AVG Free with no plugins or extra components (IE, only the anti-virus engine).  I don't like any more overhead than there needs to be and besides, an anti-virus scanner alone is only about 20% of the protection and scanning/dection ability you'll need in the end anyway.

I have been thinking of late of trying Avast again.  I last tried it about 3 or 4 years ago, and it annoyed the hell out of me then because every now and then it would produce a pop-up window basically asking you to "upgrade" to the paid version.  If there's one thing I loathe, it's being prompted by any form of ad.  Free products should never nag you.  It did a great job, but I just couldn't take being occasionally annoyed.  I think I remember RuneFox recently saying it no longer did this.

I can add another one to the horrible list: Trend Micro's Officescan.  We use that on on the systems at work, and it's quite bad at detecting anything.  Running low-level scanners like Malwarebytes, I frequently discover multitudes of infected files on machines supposedly protected by Trend Micro.  They seem to be bad at both new viruses (ones less than 30 days old) and low-level worms and trojans.



			
				Ep1c_Pha1l said:
			
		

> Ahh someone knowledgeable. I'd love to talk to you more about this  stuff, I'm really interested in getting a job in computer security.



This field sucks - I'd suggest something more rewarding.


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 23, 2010)

ToeClaws said:


> On Window's partitions, I use AVG Free with no plugins or extra components (IE, only the anti-virus engine).  I don't like any more overhead than there needs to be and besides, an anti-virus scanner alone is only about 20% of the protection and scanning/dection ability you'll need in the end anyway.
> 
> I have been thinking of late of trying Avast again.  I last tried it about 3 or 4 years ago, and it annoyed the hell out of me then because every now and then it would produce a pop-up window basically asking you to "upgrade" to the paid version.  If there's one thing I loathe, it's being prompted by any form of ad.  Free products should never nag you.  It did a great job, but I just couldn't take being occasionally annoyed.  I think I remember RuneFox recently saying it no longer did this.
> 
> ...




Well, I've gotten into cracking systems through social engineering (Keylogging/RAT's.) I do it more for the information and use it because it's a LOT easier then a regular attack. I also like the computer security field. I want to find some way to design a scanner that can truly analysis a piece of malware on the fly and can get nearly 100 % detection rates. 

That's part of the reason I want to go into the field, to make it harder for people like me in the future...


----------



## ToeClaws (Feb 23, 2010)

Ep1c_Pha1l said:


> That's part of the reason I want to go into the field, to make it harder for people like me in the future...



I would suggest signing up to take SANS hacking course - very intense, but neat (if not disturbing) to learn about compromises.  I doubt, however, there will ever be a way to catch everything on the fly with 100% success because there will always be something new, and always be unethical people willing to try to exploit things.  It's one of the great human failings - we cannot simply behave ourselves. :?


----------



## CyberFoxx (Feb 23, 2010)

Other: ClamAV


----------



## CaptainCool (Feb 23, 2010)

i dont know what problems you have with norton =/ until now its always been the best tool for me.
im using norton 360 3.0 right now and its working very well! it doesnt use many resources and i barely recognize that its even there.
i like it :T


----------



## DakotaJaymes (Feb 23, 2010)

I've been using Avast! Home for quite a while, and I think that it's pretty good for being free.

I've tried Symantec, McAfee, AVG, Avira, Bit Defender, and a few others, but Avast! seems to be the best one... at least for this PC.


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Feb 23, 2010)

My Dad uses Norton, so I get a free copy of it from him and it's worked fine for me. I haven't noticed it stealing all my performance and it seems to detect and block all sorts of threats when I use flash drives that have been in infected computers.


----------



## torachi (Feb 23, 2010)

Avast, despite its never shutting up.


----------



## ToeClaws (Feb 23, 2010)

torachi said:


> Avast, despite its never shutting up.



Doh... so it still nags?


----------



## Apoc666 (Feb 23, 2010)

I like Avast! mainly because it didn't slow down my PC during the scan. AVG was useless, Mcafee put the viruses there, same with Norton and Avira just gummed up the whole works.


----------



## Hir (Feb 23, 2010)

AVG Pro is my favourite of the ones I've tried.

Norton is the most useless software I've ever been graced with, it never EVER picked up on a virus.


----------



## ArielMT (Feb 23, 2010)

Norton used to be a good line of products, but it isn't anymore.  Even though the products have begun improving slightly in the last year or so, the company behind them has not, and because Internet security products run on a subscription model now, that makes the company managing the subscriptions (Symantec) a huge part of Norton's problems.

One of my customers lost a two-year subscription renewal to Norton Internet Security because the program refused to accept the subscription renewal key, and because Symantec refused to help him fix the problem.  They refused to do so much as acknowledge that a problem existed without billing for a support call, and they refused to refund him because they had already issued the key.  Granted, this was a few years ago, but for all the improvements I've heard about in their products, I've heard nothing about improvements in their customer service and technical support.


----------



## Apoc666 (Feb 23, 2010)

DarkNoctus said:


> AVG Pro is my favourite of the ones I've tried.
> 
> Norton is the most useless software I've ever been graced with, it never EVER picked up on a virus.



I hear a lot of great things about AVG, I just got a shit copy


----------



## ArielMT (Feb 23, 2010)

Best anti-virus?  My company has no official recommended software, but I always wind up recommending AVG Free Edition to my customers.

I've also heard good things about Kaspersky's line of products, and the only support call I ever took regarding Kaspersky was a billed on-site request to install the Internet security suite for one of my customers several years ago.

Edit: I use ClamAV on Linux and AVG Free on Windows.


----------



## Apoc666 (Feb 23, 2010)

I'm stuck with Norton Fail Scan and Mcfail!


----------



## torachi (Feb 23, 2010)

ToeClaws said:


> Doh... so it still nags?


On the average of about once an hour. Really annoying when you're trying to watch a movie/listen to music. But this just prompted me to stop being lazy and untoggle the sounds option. No longer a worry.


----------



## ToeClaws (Feb 23, 2010)

torachi said:


> On the average of about once an hour. Really annoying when you're trying to watch a movie/listen to music. But this just prompted me to stop being lazy and untoggle the sounds option. No longer a worry.



Damn.  That's why I stopped using it a few years ago.  It's a really, really good anti-virus platform, but that's just annoying. :/


----------



## incongruency (Feb 23, 2010)

ToeClaws said:


> Doh... so it still nags?


It does not.  Version five is a vast improvement, and leaves you alone, without consuming many resources.



torachi said:


> On the average of about once an hour. Really annoying when you're trying to watch a movie/listen to music. But this just prompted me to stop being lazy and untoggle the sounds option. No longer a worry.


What version are you running?  If you're not running version five I'd suggest you update soon.  Not only is the nagging behavior gone, it's safer to run with the newer version.

In the off chance you are running version five, did you ever bother to get the free registration?


----------



## Runefox (Feb 23, 2010)

torachi said:


> On the average of about once an hour. Really annoying when you're trying to watch a movie/listen to music. But this just prompted me to stop being lazy and untoggle the sounds option. No longer a worry.





			
				ToeClaws said:
			
		

> Damn. That's why I stopped using it a few years ago. It's a really, really good anti-virus platform, but that's just annoying. :/



Totally false. Avast! performs a database update once per day, which by default plays a sound (which you can and should turn off; See Sounds in the options menu); It also slides a non-focused infobox notifying you of this. You can turn this notification off altogether by entering silent mode, or by deselecting "Show notification box after automatic update" in the Updates section of the options menu.

Unless you have an infection and it's telling you about infected files being intercepted, it's otherwise silent. I scarcely remember I have it running.

On that note, even version 4 had the same amount of notifications as 5 does, only with a male voiceover for the sounds and with a smaller box (which _did_ kick you out of fullscreen apps). I can't think of a time where Avast! has ever popped a notification every hour.

... Unless you set the virus database to update every hour.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Feb 23, 2010)

Other (Linux's natural immunity)!


----------



## ToeClaws (Feb 23, 2010)

Runefox said:


> Totally false. Avast! performs a database update once per day, which by default plays a sound (which you can and should turn off; See Sounds in the options menu); It also slides a non-focused infobox notifying you of this. You can turn this notification off altogether by entering silent mode, or by deselecting "Show notification box after automatic update" in the Updates section of the options menu.
> 
> Unless you have an infection and it's telling you about infected files being intercepted, it's otherwise silent. I scarcely remember I have it running.
> 
> ...



Well perhaps I'll give it a try again then.  The version that I tried around 3 years ago popped up notifications for updates and such, which I could silence, but it also popped up notifications urging me to update to the paid version for better protection.  Could just be that it was some nag-tweaked version of the normal free one that I was unlucky enough to get instead.

Since you're running it Rune, can you tell it to exempt locations on the drive?


----------



## Runefox (Feb 23, 2010)

ToeClaws said:


> Since you're running it Rune, can you tell it to exempt locations on the drive?



Very easily. You can also exclude solely from the real-time shield if you'd like, with fine-tuned controls over when to exclude.


----------



## torachi (Feb 23, 2010)

Runefox said:


> Totally false.


 
Why would I lie about this? I have Avast Home 4.8. I didnt say it did it every hour, I said on average about once an hour. Maybe thats was a bit of an exaggeration, but i'd say about 10 times a day i'd hear it telling me that the virus database has been updated. And thats only when I was around my computer.

Now, as I said, its no longer a problem.

edit: checked it, its not set to update every hour, just "automatic". and yes, i've had it registered since i got it.


----------



## incongruency (Feb 23, 2010)

torachi said:


> I have Avast Home 4.8


Again, I would suggest you upgrade to version five.  4.8 will not be supported forever, and the sooner you upgrade the less you have to eventually worry about.


----------



## Runefox (Feb 23, 2010)

torachi said:


> Why would I lie about this? I have Avast Home 4.8. I didnt say it did it every hour, I said on average about once an hour. Maybe thats was a bit of an exaggeration, but i'd say about 10 times a day i'd hear it telling me that  the virus database has been updated. And thats only when I was around my computer.



In that case, you must have set the virus database to update once per hour (or thereabouts); By default, it updates only once per day. I can't check to be sure about Avast 4.8, but Avast 5 certainly has the option of disabling notifications for updates entirely, including the sound, and will automatically do so if you're in a full-screen application (games, movies).

EDIT: I'd say your install is probably corrupt in that case. At any rate, grab version 5, it's much better overall.


----------



## incongruency (Feb 23, 2010)

Runefox said:


> By default, it updates only once per day.


Just a note, but both versions four and five default to updating every four hours.


----------



## torachi (Feb 23, 2010)

incongruency said:


> What version are you running? If you're not running version five I'd suggest you update soon. Not only is the nagging behavior gone, it's safer to run with the newer version.


 
Good call, im not an expert on these things...

I will be getting ver. 5


----------



## Runefox (Feb 23, 2010)

incongruency said:


> Just a note, but both versions four and five default to updating every four hours.



Yeah, checking it, I was wrong about that; It'll _check_ for updates every four hours. However, I don't think I've ever seen it actually update every four hours (it usually pops one notification per day for me, but my "days" are strange; Today, I woke up at 5PM. =D).


----------



## SnowFox (Feb 23, 2010)

Would you say Avast was better than the paid for version of AVG 8.5/9?
Does it have a command line scan/update option?

I used to like AVG but not so much any more. It's pretty bloated and the default install is WAY too intrusive and it managed to let in internet security 2010 on one computer and even when I manually scanned one of it's .exe's it still missed it.
I'm pretty much stuck with it for the next 2 years though unless I waste a license. One good thing is it doesn't seem to limit the number of computers you install on, we bought a 5 computer license at work and managed to install it on 10+ computers with no problem.


----------



## Ratte (Feb 23, 2010)

norton blows.  it attacked my computer when i first got it (was trying to get everything up and running and it freaked out on me).  tried avg.  avg kept 404ing already loaded pages to its own 404 page.  that was pissing me off.  got avast back in may-june and i never had a problem.

avast is a cool bro.


----------



## Runefox (Feb 23, 2010)

SnowFox said:


> Would you say Avast was better than the paid for version of AVG 8.5/9?
> Does it have a command line scan/update option?



I would say so. It has more advanced scanning features, more fine control, a much lighter scanning engine, virtually no bloat, and the Professional version does come with a command-line scanner (ashCmd.exe), though for most usage, ashQuick.exe will quick-scan a file/path without popping any UI while also ignoring exclusions (so pipe that into whatever you're configuring to scan (e-mail, etc)). Furthermore, every version has a boot-time scan option, though it's currently only available for 32-bit.

Another interesting feature the professional edition boasts is a "sandbox mode" to safely launch untrusted programs and browse untrusted websites in a virtual environment. Not sure how it works or how well it works, but it's something I'd like to see for myself.

EDIT: I should really say this about the topic in general: *No anti-virus is bullet-proof, and it isn't always true that the heavier the shield, the more protection will be offered.* In any case, using an anti-virus will merely provide you with a safety net. Safe browsing practices and healthy scepticism should be the first line of defense; Even the best anti-viruses will fail you if you allow yourself to ignore their warnings or do something rash thinking you're invulnerable. There's always zero-day exploits, or viruses that manipulate their signature just enough to sneak by a given anti-virus. Anti-virus definitions are always a step or two behind, regardless as to who's behind them. Always remain vigilent.


----------



## SnowFox (Feb 23, 2010)

Runefox said:


> I would say so. It has more advanced scanning features, more fine control, a much lighter scanning engine, virtually no bloat, and the Professional version does come with a command-line scanner (ashCmd.exe), though for most usage, ashQuick.exe will quick-scan a file/path without popping any UI while also ignoring exclusions (so pipe that into whatever you're configuring to scan (e-mail, etc)). Furthermore, every version has a boot-time scan option, though it's currently only available for 32-bit.
> 
> Another interesting feature the professional edition boasts is a "sandbox mode" to safely launch untrusted programs and browse untrusted websites in a virtual environment. Not sure how it works or how well it works, but it's something I'd like to see for myself.



So we'd have to get a paid for version to have a command line scanner? or is the quick-scan option available in the free one too? After looking on the website I think it might be too expensive to buy if I assume that we can't get away with it not checking how many times it's installed. When I next get time I'll have a play with it anyway. I might use it for home if nothing else.


----------



## Runefox (Feb 23, 2010)

> So we'd have to get a paid for version to have a command line scanner? or is the quick-scan option available in the free one too?


The quick-scan option (ashQuick) is available in the free version, only the command-line scanner (ashCmd) isn't, since it can be used to schedule scans, a Pro-only option. You can actually get by that by creating your own scripts to run ashQuick, and that's talked about at length in some topics on their own forums. At any rate, they use the same engine as the UI, and Avast! should still be accessible in Safe Mode to run if that's a concern.


----------



## Alvine33 (Feb 23, 2010)

Microsoft Security Essentials


----------



## SnowFox (Feb 23, 2010)

Runefox said:


> The quick-scan option (ashQuick) is available in the free version, only the command-line scanner (ashCmd) isn't, since it can be used to schedule scans, a Pro-only option. You can actually get by that by creating your own scripts to run ashQuick, and that's talked about at length in some topics on their own forums. At any rate, they use the same engine as the UI, and Avast! should still be accessible in Safe Mode to run if that's a concern.



Oh ok, the way I have it at the moment is running it in a batch script after running a backup at the end of the day since a lot of the computers are so old/messed up that they're barely usable if there's a scan running during the day.


----------



## Apoc666 (Feb 23, 2010)

I heard many wonderful things about AVG but mine never did any of those wonderful things, mainly because it was free and a shit copy.


----------



## Runefox (Feb 23, 2010)

Apoc666 said:


> I heard many wonderful things about AVG but mine never did any of those wonderful things, mainly because it was free and a shit copy.



Actually, the free version of AVG tends to be the one that most people are talking about - The paid-for version just tacks on things like a firewall and SPAM filter.


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 23, 2010)

Runefox said:


> Actually, the free version of AVG tends to be the one that most people are talking about - The paid-for version just tacks on things like a firewall and SPAM filter.



Avast free does so much more. I've never seen anyone except nod32 and G-data tackle Iframes in web pages. Makes you a lot more secure, even if avira detects 1.2 % more malware.

AVG is a fail program. LOW detection rates, bloat, no decent features.


----------



## Apoc666 (Feb 23, 2010)

The AVG I got was crap, Avast! did a better job


----------



## ToeClaws (Feb 23, 2010)

Runefox said:


> Very easily. You can also exclude solely from the real-time shield if you'd like, with fine-tuned controls over when to exclude.



Excellent - thanks.


----------



## Nollix (Feb 23, 2010)

Ep1c_Pha1l said:


> Well, I've gotten into cracking systems through social engineering (Keylogging/RAT's.) ...


You are a script kiddie. Stop it.


----------



## Runefox (Feb 23, 2010)

Nollix said:


> You are a script kiddie. Stop it.



Well, in his defense, you've gotta start somewhere, right? At least he wants to learn more and isn't claiming to be able to h4x0r j00 n00bz and GAT UR IP ADRUSS NAD BLOW UP UR MODAM


----------



## ArielMT (Feb 23, 2010)

Ep1c_Pha1l said:


> AVG is a fail program. LOW detection rates, bloat, no decent features.



Can you support these claims, please?


----------



## hitokage (Feb 24, 2010)

Other - Sophos Anti-virus.


----------



## william727 (Feb 24, 2010)

fuck i went the wrong thing i was meant to go Avira but i went avast well there both good but avira is better (like how vista is more safe than xp)


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 24, 2010)

Nollix said:


> You are a script kiddie. Stop it.



I'm no hacker. I'm no skid. 

I deal with cracking using social engineering. It's things like getting the schools admin password. I did that by saying I needed it for helping to ironicly, get the keyboard plugged in. I love how stupid the librarians are.

Sorry, I don't hack dude. I know SHIT about networking. It's to fucking complicated. I can only program in TI-Basic, and not even well.


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 24, 2010)

ArielMT said:


> Can you support these claims, please?




http://www.av-comparatives.org/

Any articles in the past year. 

Avast 5 and avg 9 should only do better. 

Yes, I don't talk out of my ass.


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 24, 2010)

Runefox said:


> Well, in his defense, you've gotta start somewhere, right? At least he wants to learn more and isn't claiming to be able to h4x0r j00 n00bz and GAT UR IP ADRUSS NAD BLOW UP UR MODAM



I was threatend by a skid who I told him my IP was 127.0.0.1. He started to talk about how he's "Deleting my hard-drive"  and that I'm "Through a firewall"

That's a skid. I don't pretend to hack.


----------



## SnowFox (Feb 24, 2010)

Ep1c_Pha1l said:


> I was threatend by a skid who I told him my IP was 127.0.0.1. He started to talk about how he's "Deleting my hard-drive"  and that I'm "Through a firewall"
> 
> That's a skid. I don't pretend to hack.



Is this you?


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 24, 2010)

SnowFox said:


> Is this you?



No, It was a different event... Though I saw a lot of similarity between mine and his. That was on a German chat anyway. Lol.


----------



## Kaviado (Feb 24, 2010)

...


----------



## Runefox (Feb 24, 2010)

Kaviado said:


> Since when does social engineering involve keylogging and RATs?


I guess getting them in there to begin with. I've heard cases where people have posed as janitorial staff to penetrate otherwise bulletproof security and install keyloggers on company machines as a means of penetration testing. Really interesting how playing to sensibilities and weaknesses can make it easy to penetrate a network and totally compromise virtually everything from the inside rather than brute-forcing your way in.



> In any case, answer is Other: Comodo IS. I use this not so much for the antivirus component as for the process monitor which makes any sort of retroactive AV unnecessary, as no process can perform any of various operations without authorisation anyway.



I usually recommend Comodo when someone needs that extra layer of security, for when they don't reliably have control over everything that happens on their computers (like, say, if it's a shared machine). It's _very_ good at doing its job, and it's _very_ good at making the uninitiated shy away from doing anything silly. It's a very, very tight solution, and tested leak-proof.


----------



## ArielMT (Feb 24, 2010)

Ep1c_Pha1l said:


> http://www.av-comparatives.org/
> 
> Any articles in the past year.
> 
> ...


I ask again for evidence supporting your claims:


Ep1c_Pha1l said:


> AVG is a fail program. LOW detection rates, bloat, no decent features.


I ask again because the reports I read on site to which you linked which do so much as address your claims seem to oppose them.  I am not so set in my ways that I would stubbornly hold on to any recommendation after it became bad or invalid; if I was, then I'd still be recommending Ad-Aware highly and not recommending MBAM at all in the arena of adware/spyware removal.  I am swayed by objective analysis, not subjective opinions.

How is AVG a fail program?
By what measure does it have low detection rates?
By what measure does it have bloat, and how does that relate to other anti-virus applications?
By what definition of "decent features" does AVG lack any?
Thank you.


----------



## Runefox (Feb 24, 2010)

> By what measure does it have bloat, and how does that relate to other anti-virus applications?



I can sort of field this one. While it's nowhere near the worst out there, in my experience it typically consumes in around 30-50MB of RAM while running, which is higher than the ~15MB for Norton 2009 (which I'm fairly sure remains in 2010), and much higher than the <10MB for Avast (usually hovers around 6MB; Right now, combined, Avast's two services are taking up just over 5MB of RAM on my machine with resident shield enabled).

AVG's been becoming less and less efficient with its use of memory and CPU time since it made the transition from 7.5 to 8.0. Still well within tolerance, however; We still used it at the shop and it still performed fairly well. 9.0 hit and there were some fairly hefty issues with the transition; One very important issue in the business world is the Exchange/Outlook plugin not being upgraded properly, and remaining at the old 8.5 version. The plugin fails to launch, Outlook/Exchange crashes on load, and a complete removal via the removal tool and fresh reinstall is necessary to fix it. Another, less serious issue was focus-stealing every 30 minutes, including to the point of knocking you out of a full-screen app. Annoying. But particularly annoying and the major reason why I won't use AVG in the future was that the devs were very lax in actually acknowledging and fixing these rather obvious bugs.

And here's where it comes into personal experience, and where Your Mileage May Vary(TM): I've just found the scanner to be slower than Avast's. Running AVG caused a rather noticeable drop in general system performance on my computer versus running without, which is very neatly addressed by Avast. Until I finally decided to give Avast a go again, I'd been uninstalling and installing AVG off and on for several months, feeling the need to have some kind of realtime protection while at the same time not appreciating the decline in performance.

Anyway, as for the rest of it, I dunno. In terms of features, AVG is pretty average. I wouldn't be able to tell you with regard to detection rates. The new Avast hasn't been properly benchmarked as of yet and does contain extra features in that regard, including a new Behavior scanner, so that's a little up in the air.


----------



## ArielMT (Feb 24, 2010)

That's the sort of answer I was looking for.  Thank you.

Edit: LOL wut?
|
v


----------



## Atrak (Feb 24, 2010)

Just going to say this for the one person that voted Kaspersky: it's epic failure. It's an antivirus program that gets viruses from it's own updates :V . I know from experience.


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 25, 2010)

Runefox said:


> I guess getting them in there to begin with. I've heard cases where people have posed as janitorial staff to penetrate otherwise bulletproof security and install keyloggers on company machines as a means of penetration testing. Really interesting how playing to sensibilities and weaknesses can make it easy to penetrate a network and totally compromise virtually everything from the inside rather than brute-forcing your way in.
> 
> Exactly. This is what I mean. I don't have the balls or know how to do something like that, but I frequently leave "Remnents" on "Cleansed" machines. It's why my enemies have complained to me about people hacking there myspace frequently.
> 
> ...



Comodo is amazing. I use it for my HIPS and Firewall. I love how sensitive it is.


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 25, 2010)

ArielMT said:


> I ask again for evidence supporting your claims:
> 
> I ask again because the reports I read on site to which you linked which do so much as address your claims seem to oppose them.  I am not so set in my ways that I would stubbornly hold on to any recommendation after it became bad or invalid; if I was, then I'd still be recommending Ad-Aware highly and not recommending MBAM at all in the arena of adware/spyware removal.  I am swayed by objective analysis, not subjective opinions.
> 
> ...




The license from AV-comparatives says that I can't link to individual articles. Check the most recent dynamic test article's.

I also do fairly basic testing of anti-virus programs (How well it catches stuff in a VM-ware, browsing to malware infested sites... The works) 

AVG lacks a network shield (Basic HIPS that avast has. It's quite nice. One of the few things kaspersky did right.) 
It lacks a web-shield (If it finds an exploit that downloads a FUD Trojan, your fine even if it would not have detected the Trojan) 
The Boot time scan and more advanced anti-root kit stuff, I frequently use avast for dealing with rootkit's because it incorporates GMER anti-rootkit as it's main anti-rootkit. 

All of this for free.


----------



## Carenath (Feb 25, 2010)

Eset Smart Security running on my laptop and netbook (mostly because I have no faith in Windows Firewall to do any kind of useful job).

Next to no overhead and it doesn't pester me, it just sits in the background, a small popup notification to let me know it's updated the database.. and it just works away and doesn't annoy me. Well worth the money spent if you're going to put any at all into a good antivirus tool.
AVG was good until they moved past v7... these days it's as bad as Norton and McAfee. I'd recommend Avira if you really want a free solution.. only it nags and nags every time it runs.


----------



## Supersonic Bears (Feb 25, 2010)

I've used Mcafee for four years. I never understood how bad it was until now.

Thanks guys.
I just downloaded avast


----------



## Ep1c_Pha1l (Feb 25, 2010)

Silver Burrito said:


> I've used Mcafee for four years. I never understood how bad it was until now.
> 
> Thanks guys.
> I just downloaded avast



Make sure you completely remove mcafee and use it's removal tool to clean up remnants that the uninstaller could not get.


----------



## The Aeroplane (Feb 25, 2010)

Microsoft Security Essentials.


----------



## AMV_Ph34r (Mar 3, 2010)

I use Microsoft Security Essentials. Some say it's not good, but it works fine for me, it integrates seamlessly with Windows, and it's free! How much better can you get?


----------



## Verin Asper (Mar 3, 2010)

I use between AVG and Comodo


----------



## Gavrill (Mar 3, 2010)

I'm using Webroot, it's alright. But I was stupid and turned off the firewall for a bit so I'm suddenly crawling in viruses. :[

I downloaded avast for when my subscription to Webroot runs out.


----------



## xcliber (Mar 3, 2010)

I had the full McAfee security suite free when I had Comcast as my ISP. It worked well and saved my ass on several occasions. I don't have any anti-virus ATM though. I need to get one.

I tried AVG and for whatever reason, even when it wasn't scanning, one of the processes was constantly accessing my HDD and slowing down access times. I thought that my system could handle any anti-virus software without taking a performance hit since I have a Core i7 with 6GB of DDR3. I was wrong.


----------



## Scotty1700 (Mar 3, 2010)

My vote's Avast antivirus. Lol funny story, my bro sent me a link to a page infested with like 50+ trojans and avast blocked them all 

Care to test out YOUR antivirus? I'll gladly post the link


----------



## ArielMT (Mar 3, 2010)

Scotty1700 said:


> Care to test out YOUR antivirus? I'll gladly post the link



You'd be better off not.


----------



## PanzerschreckLeopard (Mar 4, 2010)

Which of these are actually free?


----------



## blackedsoul (Mar 4, 2010)

uhh idk, the school has AVG and it fails miserably XD


----------



## Fuzzy Alien (Mar 4, 2010)

NOD32 rocks; sure, it isn't free, but it sure keeps your hard drive clean.


----------



## Runefox (Mar 5, 2010)

blackedsoul said:


> uhh idk, the school has AVG and it fails miserably XD



Actually, in an environment like that, if the antivirus is set up to ask, you'll usually see people hit "ignore" to get it to stop bitching when they're trying to access a certain site or game. Quite inconsiderate, but then again, 1) it's not their problem if something goes wrong, and 2) most of them don't know any better anyway.


----------



## AMV_Ph34r (Mar 5, 2010)

PanzerschreckLeopard said:


> Which of these are actually free?


Avast and AVG have free versions, but I haven't had great experiences with either, although AVG's not that bad. Microsoft Security Essentials is free if you have Genuine Windows (i.e. didn't pirate it, or are good enough at pirating that the program can't tell), and it works pretty well. Lifehacker says it's the best preforming free antivirus software, but I guess it's mostly a matter of opinion.


----------



## Runefox (Mar 5, 2010)

Avira is also free.


----------



## KirbyCowFox (Mar 5, 2010)

I've never had a good experience with Avast, it never caught viruses and it always kept telling me to buy a better version.  I used to use SpySweeper, it was the only program I know of that caught a Trojan and got it out of the computer completely without any trouble.  Too bad I missed a few updates and now I have to buy an all new version in order to get the program back.

I'm tempted to try Norton since my school gives away free copies that don't expire to students.  What's to lose?


----------



## Captain Spyro (Mar 5, 2010)

Mac. :3

Seriously, before my Windows laptop died, I used AVG. Best damned anti-virus I ever used.


----------

