Author Topic: Anti-Virus Package (Read 193,885 times)

superboyac · « **Reply #50 on:** September 13, 2006, 04:26 PM »

AOL sucks, that's the catch. The virus protection may be good, but AOL itself is a virus.

mwb1100 · « **Reply #51 on:** September 13, 2006, 04:29 PM »

Quote from: tomos on September 13, 2006, 04:12 PM

I notice AOL Active Virus Shield is no. 2 on that list
Anyone know is there a catch to that being free ?? (well, AOL ...)

Apparently AOL Active Virus Shield is an OEM version of Kaspersky - the catch I've heard about is that there is some controversy over the license - that it may leave open the possibliliy of adware/spyware. Also, the toolbar is apparently based on something that used to be spyware. However, as far as I know there is no spyware currently in the product, but some people have complained that the license has loopholes:

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=printArticleBasic&articleId=9002564

rjbull · « **Reply #52 on:** September 14, 2006, 11:09 AM »

Quote from: superboyac on September 13, 2006, 03:59 PM

F-Prot is a program I tried once because it sounded like F-Secure. It turned out to be decent.

Last time I checked, F-Prot had a generous license; one payment gave you the right to use it on anything up to 30 computers if they were for your personal use.

mitzevo · « **Reply #53 on:** December 03, 2006, 06:40 PM »

I just have to comment.. Panda Software (including Panda Anti-Virus) has the most beautiful UI..

Honestly, the User Interface is so clean and nice. I wish all anti-virus would have professional UIs like Panda's softwares.

nudone · « **Reply #54 on:** December 03, 2006, 09:39 PM »

as i've recently installed the free AOL 'active virus shield' that uses Kaspersky (as mentioned by mwb1100 above), i can happily report that you don't have to install it's browser toolbar.

so, other than maybe receiving some spam from them in the future (they claim not to be sending any at present) i'm pleased with the product. Kaspersky is very highly rated (as is this AOL version) so it looks like a perfect program to me - almost regardless of it being free.

wreckedcarzz · « **Reply #55 on:** December 03, 2006, 10:52 PM »

I (being the security-nut-insane-geek-nerd) have tried and used almost all the antvirus programs out there, so here I list the popular ones off of the top of my head (with ratings, of course) - I may make a complete list later.

Norton Systemworks 2001: 2/5
Norton Systemworks 2003: 2.5/5
Avast! Home Edition: 4/5
AVG Free Edition: 4.5/5
BitDefender 8 Free Edition: 4/5
AntiVir PersonalEdition Classic: 4/5
McAffee Internet Security Suite: 4/5

Windows Live OneCare: I am using this now and it is not the best (needs more options, but is still in heavy development) but still far from the worst (sure beats Avast! and BitDefender off the list - Norton and McAffee are always off the list anyways), but I love the fact that I can blame Microsoft for a problem

...well not really. But here is the run down on it and why I like it:

It scans for Viruses AND spyware both on-demand and silently (if you choose to install Windows Defender - previously Microsoft Antispyware).

It defragments and cleanes your hard drives both on-demand and silently.

It Backs-Up and restores your files both on-demand and silently.

It can be installed on 3 PC's for 1 year for only $50.

And if that isn't enough, they even offer an online FREE version, a 90 day free trial period (WITH Tech support via email) and if you purchase it and need help you can chat online, email them or talk over the phone!

Anyways, enough about Windows stuff.
Basically if you need high-end security for free, go to AntiVir PersonalEdition Classic or AVG Free. If you need more, try WLOC or ZoneLabs solutions.

AdIyhc · « **Reply #56 on:** December 04, 2006, 12:20 AM »

The AVG Internet Security Suite is actually pretty good. No compatiability issues with other software.

If you are buying, I reccommend this. Light on wallet too.

Darwin · « **Reply #57 on:** December 04, 2006, 03:27 AM »

If you live in USA, you can get Kaspersky AV free and get a $40 rebate ! They're actually paying you to use their software...

mitzevo · « **Reply #58 on:** December 04, 2006, 02:43 PM »

Quote from: Darwin on December 04, 2006, 03:27 AM

If you live in USA, you can get Kaspersky AV free and get a $40 rebate ! They're actually paying you to use their software...

That's what big companies should be doing.. paying consumers to use their stuff. Seems normal since.. well.. we are taking the time to use the application.. and after all, time is money.. and no body like's to waste time.. I know this is a bit extreme, but it makes sense..

wreckedcarzz: systemworks 2003? pretty old.. don't you think? maybe you should try the latest versions

tomos · « **Reply #59 on:** December 04, 2006, 04:56 PM »

Quote

That's what big companies should be doing.. paying consumers to use their stuff. Seems normal since.. well.. we are taking the time to use the application.. and after all, time is money.. and no body like's to waste time.. I know this is a bit extreme, but it makes sense..

not being in the States, I unfortunately don't get paid to use [Kapersky's] software

I have taken the risk, chanced the ol' arm-leg & email/address, & have gone with AOL's "Active Virus Shield"

I gotta say I really like it.
(I just wish I didn't feel so nervous whenever I check my email - but no spam/junk yet & one week down)

Anyways,
it says: "Powered by Kapersky",
it's easy to use, updates every hour - no confirmations required,
& has found a couple of "Trojan" adware thingies - confirmed by Spyware Terminater. So I'm very happy
(soo far ...)

Darwin · « **Reply #60 on:** December 04, 2006, 05:55 PM »

Another big software company is paying US customers to use their software: Norton Antivirus 2007 3-user pack. They're paying 9$ (given as a Visa debit card). Ends December 9.

NOTE: This is just a public service announcement. I'm in Canada and can't take advantage of these deals

, so don't shoot me if you are reading this from a non-US locale - we're in the same boat! Also, I am not endorsing Norton - I think it's bloatware.

tomos · « **Reply #61 on:** December 04, 2006, 06:21 PM »

I guess they get your money when you go to update -
the last time I had norton for 2 computers (2003/04 ..) it cost something around €60
(Euro = $1.2 @ wild guess

)

wreckedcarzz · « **Reply #62 on:** December 05, 2006, 03:26 AM »

Quoted from above: "wreckedcarzz: systemworks 2003? pretty old.. don't you think? maybe you should try the latest versions

"
Well I don't got $200 bucks a year to buy & use software that basicly has dissappointed most of us - why would we buy something we don't think is a good product anymore?

(and if you are using Symantec's software now and are reading my post excuse me but...hey is that a virus on your computer? Oh, Norton says no, so all the pop-ups MUST be good!)

lanux128 · « **Reply #63 on:** December 05, 2006, 04:49 AM »

like tomos, with much trepidation i had installed "Active Virus Shield" on my spare computer.

so far, it hasn't caused any problems or conflicts. and slowly, i'm beginning to think that since this AOL program is based on Kaspersky Lab's av engine, there shouldn't be any hanky-panky for Kaspersky Lab have a reputation to maintain.. anyway, if things stay the way they are, this AV can be a good contender in the freeware category..

but then again, i'd like to hear about any misgivings other users had with this program..

f0dder · « **Reply #64 on:** December 19, 2006, 02:26 AM »

I think we really need to link to

that comic...

superboyac · « **Reply #65 on:** December 19, 2006, 11:58 PM »

fodder, that's funny...reminds me of a story:

A few weeks ago, my sister was presented with this alumni of the year award at UCLA, and at the banquet, there was a table reserved for symantec employees. I was tempted on more than one occasion to go and provoke the poor saps about their company, but I resisted it. I figured it's not really their fault, their just a few of the fresh, young employees that are just happy to have a good job. Besides, I didn't want to look like a lunatic in front of everyone. But I gave them the dirty stare-down as I passed their table.

iphigenie · « **Reply #66 on:** February 16, 2007, 02:13 PM »

I tried quite a few of these and registered quite a few for a year. Tend to change as I do find the renewal fees quite high

A quick disclaimer of things i don't like: forcing you to change mail settings, messing with the file system, not having a way to exclude certain files (i use remote admin, for example, and i dont want it "cleaned" every time), cheesy skins (i have windows blinds i dont want software with their own weird skins)

AVG free / commercial - i thought it was quite a good software, and one that did pop transparently rather than expecting you to change your mail settings (a big no no for me). Competitive price cause the license is 2 years. I can't remember why I didnt renew when the 2 years were up.

Kasperski - tested it but I hated what it did on the filesystem, storing checksums and stuff in the ntfs streams. that caused huge havoc with several other utilities and was an absolute nightmare to clean up. I'm sure that you can install it so it doesn't do that, but it didnt bother to give me the choice and that really caused me more annoyances than it was worth.

Norton - incredibly heavy

McAfee - i used that one for years around 1998-2002 and it was a nice product then. Haven't tried it recently.

Antivir - i like it's simple interface. I used the free version on my "alternate" computers

Avast free - that's the one I tell non-savvy friends to use. It feels quite user friendly and the alerts and messages are usually quite good.

Nod - i really like Nod's speed, and i quite like the attitude of people from eset when i see them post things etc. They feal like real people. I often "almost bought it" but the price is quite high so i end up taking some special offer on something else. But this spring I might go for it.

Bitdefender - the one i got this year (yup, it was a special deal). it's quite light on the CPU and quite inobtrusive once you tell it to hide the status windows. Works really nicely scanning pop incoming mail (doesnt do imap that i could see). It is a bit inflexible though - it keeps wanting to quarantine my remote administrator executable, and for some files (for example games with those 60 minute tryout system) it will block access but not let you delete them either via itself or via any tool. I have similar annoyance with the firewall component.

Trend Micro - that's one i want to try, i have heard great things from some of my asian friends, seems quite unknown around here though. Silly name, too. Anyone try it?

f0dder · « **Reply #67 on:** February 16, 2007, 02:40 PM »

Quote from: "iphigenie"

Kasperski - tested it but I hated what it did on the filesystem, storing checksums and stuff in the ntfs streams. that caused huge havoc with several other utilities and was an absolute nightmare to clean up. I'm sure that you can install it so it doesn't do that, but it didnt bother to give me the choice and that really caused me more annoyances than it was worth.

Only thing I experienced problems with was Rootkit Revealer... and as for getting rid of, there was an option on uninstall. And I'm pretty sure you were given the choice, it's an install option. Might not be very well explained, but it was there. Recent versions have moved away from per-file NTFS streams anyway, and use a couple of central databases instead.

Quote from: "iphigenie"

Bitdefender - the one i got this year (yup, it was a special deal). it's quite light on the CPU and quite inobtrusive once you tell it to hide the status windows. Works really nicely scanning pop incoming mail (doesnt do imap that i could see). It is a bit inflexible though - it keeps wanting to quarantine my remote administrator executable, and for some files (for example games with those 60 minute tryout system) it will block access but not let you delete them either via itself or via any tool. I have similar annoyance with the firewall component.

You don't have a Hyper-Threading or Dual-Core CPU then, and aren't running Win9x?

The amount of BSODs I've had because of BitDefender is quite high (I'm servicing 10-15 machines at a museum). It also routinely fails to re-launch after applying an upgrade, and whatnot. The net result is I've had to turn off hyperthreading on all the machines.

Fortunately, the license period is over, so I'm off to shop new... will probably be NOD, as it's a bit cheaper than KAV, and those two are the only ones I really have faith in.

iphigenie · « **Reply #68 on:** February 16, 2007, 08:00 PM »

Shows that what person has what problems on what software is fundamentally unpredictable...

Kasperski: Well it was a while back that i used Kasperski and I think they changed quite a lot of things since. When i tried it there was a 10 step bit in the FAQ on how to remove these hidden files. I think it was my disk checker and cleaner tools which kept popping up for these files. I also encountered this again when i installed some other AV which used two engines one of which was kasperki, but that time it uninstalled correctly.

BD: I have had a BSOD once from bitdefender - actually it wasn't bitdefender which bsod'd but it was caused by bitdefender (seems it does something clumsy during its update when it unloads and reloads itself and if some other tool tries to access the same resources at the same time you get a bsod). The update process also slows down my computer quite a lot, more than the scan(!) which can be extremely problematic when playing a game. I could go manual update only but frankly i'd rather not as I might forget.

The only virus scanner i ever "loved" was Thunderbyte i think it was called. Was *fast* and had heuristics etc. That dates me a tad... I think it was sold to Norman in 98 or 99.

I am probably going to try the Trend or Eset one when BD one expires and register whichever one ticks the right boxes at that time.

Edit: went to check norman since i had been reminded of it, they seem to have put a sandbox module integrated in the product.

dk70 · « **Reply #69 on:** February 16, 2007, 08:21 PM »

Quote from: iphigenie on February 16, 2007, 02:13 PM

Avast free - that's the one I tell non-savvy friends to use. It feels quite user friendly and the alerts and messages are usually quite good.

Yes, great and unique in many ways but does not have heuristic filter like free Antivir - which should be on level with NOD32. Also with false postivies from same filter (huge improvements lately and difference between being used or not). Until recently I would have said yeah well may be not all use 10 cracks a day, gets high on p2p etc. but an email has changed my view on what is needed. So an attachment got through ISP AV and also my Avast. On arrival only Antivir and NOD32 picked it up, thanks to heuristic filter. Day after Kaspersky and a few others got it. As more days went more AVs got thumbs up. Last 2 to get updated was Microsoft and Avast - almost 2 weeks later. Already on first day I sent file to Avast for inclusion in database. Tells a bit about how much resources Avast (can) put into updating. See their forum, not uncommon. Problem was not me since I knew attachment was a virus but 3 less computer crazy family member all with Avast installed, because of me. They use same ISP so I had to contact/warn them. Avast is foolproof as a program I think, very stable and customizable but sometimes you really need better detection - when ¤#¤%# happens.

A bit embarrassing for Avast since ISP soon after warned about the virus on frontpage and most other AV seem to get updated fairly quickly. Virus aimed at getting passwords and what not for home banking, I think this one even made it to international tech news, for a minute or two. Targeted banks are still counting how much money was lost, the thing worked!

I checked and compared AVs with Virus Total btw http://www.virustotal.com/en/indexf.html

Actually Avast should have some heuristic filter for email and possibly a "high" sensitivity setting would have catched it. Normal definitely did not. They keep saying heuristic is not meaningful to implement because of false positive hell. If Im not mistaken just that used to be problem for Antivir. False positives can be risky if not dealt with correctly so concern not necessarily bad excuse. Some prove them wrong though. I tested Antivir and NOD32 for a couple of days, pop ups not really much of a problem - even on high setting.

I still have not kicked Avast out but going in that direction. May be ISP also should reconsider their choice of AV! Free Antivir is coming I guess, less features and colors - even payware version is pale compared to free Avast. NOD32 is just as good or better and you get Avast customization options for the money.

Nag screen when Antivir updates can be avoided - search for solution, I think even available on their own forum, for sure on Wilders forum http://www.wilderssecurity.com/

iphigenie · « **Reply #70 on:** February 16, 2007, 10:19 PM »

That's interesting, thanks.

Shows things seem to run in swings and roundabouts cause I uninstalled antivir from some of my machines after some bad test results in VB and places. I'm glad they're back at the top now, i like them as a company.

The basic of any protection is to drill common sense in the user and my mum knows not to open most attachments, and very often doesn't even open the valid but silly/fun ones her friends send her, so anti virus is the second line security. I mostly picked avast because it is least likely to panic her if/when it detects someone. AVG really has scary messages. And at the time i chose antivir free only offered manual updates and that's too big a risk (she forgets to run her backups and i have "no hands backup" so all she needs to do to start it is actually put the usb key in!)

PS: how many virus scanners do you run?
PS: it feels wrong to me to use a trick to bypass the nag screen. I don't like nag screens but I must say my trick would be to either not use it or pay for it

f0dder · « **Reply #71 on:** February 16, 2007, 10:55 PM »

Well, with BitDefender, back when there were still Win9x machines, those would generally have a BSOD a day. The XP machines, with HT enabled, at least a BSOD a week. With HT disabled, no BSODs, but still weird behaviour during updates. Wouldn't recommend that software to anyone.

Good old ThunderByte AntiVirus, TBAV. It was a pretty nifty piece of software back in the DOS days, the first scanner I experience with heuristics support, and a powerful cleaning module (even if some versions could be tricked). Kinda lost it when moving to windows, though... they never really got there.

dk70: even if you don't download warezzz, visit smut sites, don't open suspicious emails et cetera, heuristics and an "always-active" (as opposed to manual scans only) engine is necessary. And it needs to have a kernel-mode driver and not just ring3 hooks. Otherwise, all it takes is one single exploit, and you're doomed.

Unfortunately, turning off java, javascript and moving away from IE is not an option at the museum.

wreckedcarzz · « **Reply #72 on:** February 16, 2007, 11:56 PM »

Hey, (answering iphigenie)
Trend Micro 2007 is GREAT- I personally would not buy the full product (too many dialogs and after the user selects what to do it takes a moment to respond) however if this isn't a problem (if you mess with options or have a fast CPU) I would recommend it. I have the trial on my dad's laptop and I personally use their free ONLINE utility, Trend Micro Housecall, on my computer whenever I have troubles (it is online, free and ACTUALLY CLEANS; what more can you ask for?) I love it

dk70 · « **Reply #73 on:** February 17, 2007, 12:42 AM »

I still only have Avast and still thinking I should pay up for NOD32, alternatively Antivir because of lower price. Check subscription fee, can level out - Antivir wants you to pay full price for new subscription I think. Ive had AV set up in strange ways but this email thing got me back to real time shield. 99.99% of the time annoying waste of computer power but... So if Im convinced I should use real time I should also use the best - email story tells me that is AV with heuristic filter.

I used to have 2 AVs, always Avast but at some point also Bitdefender free edition. Normal GUI is terrible and even with no real time still requires hungry services running. I turned all that off since it also comes with a command line scanner, almost hidden and undocumented for some reason. Can autoupdate itself so an entry in XP scheduler makes it a good 2nd check tool. Think I used a batch file and got incomings checked with both Avast and Bitdefender through command line, no real time shield. I could use 4 or 10, security still stinks in "theory" because of no real time shield.

I read on Wilders forum nag screen "hack" was mentioned on their own forum. If not probably a violation of something. Nothing more than telling XP to reject a certain file to run.

What is "necessary" can be argued f0dder. This email attachment I had to warn those family members about because I knew it was suspicious. Did not need Antivir to tell me. Next time Im fooled and then heuristic is necessary for me as well, heh. Question of evaluating risk and perhaps bending security term. Many can compute happily with no AV Im sure but I have doubts about myself and Avast so should act accordingly - does not help much that virus targeted the bank I use

Will help speed up tearful good bye to Avast.

dk70 · « **Reply #74 on:** February 18, 2007, 10:03 PM »

Im testing Kaspersky right now! Have the feeling they might run off with the money unless it blows up during next few days. Would probably say the same if I tried NOD32 again but I like the extra "Pro Active" whatever stuff not available in NOD32, only takes a bit more setup. More or less like a Firewall with outbound control popups or application control.

So Ive disable office and http scanner module but Kaspersky does not really use that much ram f0dder - but you certainly feel cpu usage when scanning on demand. Ram usage also go way up while scanning. Ok, slow but great is better than the opposite. Resident part I dont notice, have enabled magical scanning so only changed/new files are interesting. Guess it works, after a total scan of course. I just did 447000 files in 2702 archives, took 52 min.

More than once I thought Firefox had died but it was only Kaspersky working! I think they can improve "Concede resources to other applications" feature! May be a bug. All the GUI around events, stats, settings beats NOD32 but not so hard to do. Nice looking program.

Actually compuer could hardly boot after installing Kaspersky. Think it needed an update, known boot bug. After some clicking at warning pop ups (all those injection threads and suspicious registry calls are all over!) it boots smoothly. The "beta" section of their forum is either cool or scary, still fighting to get engine updated it seems. Open beta forum cant be bad.

Btw, not that Im interested but Zonealarm Internet Suite 7 also use this engine and should receive updates as Kaspersky delivers. Options will be limited of course but if stable may be really good value for 50$ http://www.zonelabs.com/store/content/company/products/znalm/comparison.jsp?dc=12bms&ctry=US&lang=en&lid=zassskulist2_comparison Possible better than Kasperskys own suite at 60$, using Outpost firewall I think.