online armour vs prevx1

[lodore]

Hi,

memory useage of online armour? screenshot




thanks in advance
lodore

[archie123]

People seem very preoccupied woth memory usage , im a gamer , i run nod32 , sunbet kerio and prevx1 all the time , even when gaming , whether i run benchmarks with that lot running or not i still get the same results.

Granted i have 2 gig of very fast ram but even if you only have 1 gig i wouldnt worry about it

[lodore]

ok thanks. i cant wait to try the new lighter f-secure.

[ErikAlbert]

I'm more interested in the differences between Prevx1 and Online Armor regarding functions and working methods, than memory comparisions.
I can't do anything with memory and memory doesn't protect my computer.
You can't blame a software that your memory is too small in order to run it smoothly. Expand your memory and the problem is fixed. :)

[lodore]

very true. i want to know more about that as well.

since I can use my current f-secure license for the 2007 version im gonna give it a chance, i got a license till December anyway so if its good i can always keep it and if not dump it.

[ErikAlbert]

You can either choose for Prevx1 or Online Armor, that doesn't matter.
I choosed Prevx1, because :
- I like the philosophy behind Prevx1
- it targets all malwares
- it's simple and easy to understand for less-knowledgeable users
- it uses whitelists and blacklists, the latter isn't my favority one, but nothing is perfect.
- the Community Database is managed by knowledgeable people, who decide what is good or bad for users like me and housewives.
If Prevx1 isn't perfect, you can improve it, rather than ditching it. :)

[lodore]

good point. i do like both.

[muf]

Why not use both. A friend of mine uses both without any issue's.

muf

[lodore]

that would use to much resourse

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Why not use both. A friend of mine uses both without any issue's.

muf" }-
I prefer to learn softwares separately and I installed Prevx1 in an extreme environment without any other security softwares, except a firewall.
If I combine Prevx1 with Online Armor, I can't see what is missing in Prevx1. I like it extreme, it's more fun and more exciting. ATI + FDISR are there to save my skin. :)

[starfish_001]

No contest Prevx - very good and pretty much set and forget

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "No contest Prevx - very good and pretty much set and forget" }-
Voila, my choice is already good, my intuition didn't let me down as usual. :)

[lodore]

lol ye prevx1 is great.

but if f-secure is a free upgrade i will be using that till my license runs out.

one question do i need trend micro antispyware if i use prevx1 and an av?

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "one question do i need trend micro antispyware if i use prevx1 and an av?" }-
In theory, you don't need any scanner with Prevx1 on your computer, but I wouldn't do this unless you are an adventurer like me and well armed to recover your system. Just add Prevx1 to your existing security, that's much safer. :)

[lodore]

i was gonna add it to my current setup. but i dont really need a payed real time antispyware. because the HIPS will cover me.

[muf]

Probably no point having a dedicated realtime AS running in your setup, but an on-demand scanner is always a useful "Just to be on the safe side". If you've never seen this site before there are a few links to various web resource, online scanners and more besides. http://www.security-ops.eu.tt/

muf

[dja2k]

I have used both Prevx1 and Online Armor for a long time now with no conflict. You can't really put them in the same category (maybe later, time will tell), but one does complement the other well. I use the AV+ version of Online Armor, meaning I have Online Armor, Kaspersky AV Engine, and Prevx1. I know you don't want to be reminded of what they do, but later when the firewall is finished, all you would need for a good layer of defense would be Online Armor AV+ Firewall and Prevx1.

dja2k

[LoneWolf]

On my system OA (oasrv.exe) runs 4972k and prevx1 (pxagent.exe) runs 15244k,but memory useage is not as important to me as the security of my computer. So as you can see i have both and they do work well together.

[lodore]

if you could only use one of em which one would it be?
how many programs do you need?

i have been using f-secure internet security for nearly 2 years and have never got infected by a virus, Trojan etc. but have had a few bit of spyware but got rid of them easy.

[LoneWolf]

Well that's a tough questian. Look N Stop's my firewall,NOD32 for anti virus,XPL ScoketShield for exploits and sites known for malware,OA for hands on hips,Prevx1 for community hips. (works differant then OA) BOClean if everything else misses something bad. ewido+a squared for on demand both very good scanners. Spyware blaster? its free and i like the program. So i would have to say if you could only have 1 Prevx1 or OA is to try them both then decide for yourself.

[dja2k]

Hey lodore, first of all, I can't seem to wonder why you are concerned with memory usage when f-secure internet security uses more than lets say Kaspersky Internet Security. I wouldn't consider using OA over Prevx1 or vise versa. I have never been infected with any spyware whatsoever with this two, tested scanners (trendmicro antispyware, spyware terminator, ewido, a-squared, adaware, and spybot).

IMO, its a matter of personal choice when you think about running OA and\or Prevx1 together. I personally wouldn't dump one over the the other any time soon. :)

dja2k

[dja2k]

-{ Quote: "On my system OA (oasrv.exe) runs 4972k and prevx1 (pxagent.exe) runs 15244k,but memory useage is not as important to me as the security of my computer. So as you can see i have both and they do work well together." }-

:o Damn that is some low memory usage there. I have oasrv.exe running at 32,276 K and pxagent.exe at 33,012 K. Don't mind really, I have lots of memory to spare.

dja2k

[bellgamin]

-{ Quote: ":o Damn that is some low memory usage there. I have oasrv.exe running at 32,276 K and pxagent.exe at 33,012 K. Don't mind really, I have lots of memory to spare.

dja2k" }-In my case oasrv.exe uses 6488. pxagent.exe uses 35062 (I have since uninstalled it.)

FYI, System Safety Monitor (syssafe.exe) 10468 RAM, 10756 VM. I run oasrv.exe & syssafe.exe on 2 different images - not together.

I use the *plain* version of OA (OnlineArmor), not the AV+ version. I would expect that the AV+ version uses somewhat greater memory than what I have indicated here.

Another potential impact on OA's usage of memory is the fact that OA is extremely modular, so you can pick & choose as to which modules you wish to use. I use ALL the modules except the AV.

OA's modules include application/process guard (community-based); keylogger guard; web surfing guard; special-added protection for accessing user-specified websites such as bank accounts, stock accounts, etc; mail filter; anti-spam filter; cookie cutter; HOSTS file protection; untrusted websites special controls (see NOTE below); Firewall (available free in the near future); fully integrated Kaspersky Anti-Virus (available now at additional cost).

NOTE- Untrusted Sites: Sites that are dangerous, but you may want to visit anyway, can be marked as untrusted. If you then choose to visit such sites, OA performs extensive validations such that potentially dangerous content is automatically removed.

By the way, Stem (one of the FW experts who posts frequently here at Wilders) is one of the main beta testers of OA's firewall. OA's process guard & surfing guard have used white/black-lists for a long time now. Some aspects of OA's soon-coming free firewall also are white/black-list based. I will use just one aspect of OA's firewall (OAFW) in order to illustrate my understanding as to GENERALLY how white/black-lists function within OA's various modules. . .

-{ Quote: "In standard mode (out of the box)...

+ OAFW blocks ALL ports/protocols by default, in BOTH directions
++ If any process listens for connection or tries to make a connection, OAFW consults its whitelist. If the process is whitelisted, the connection is allowed.

With this mechanism, there is no need for a default-deny rule, because already by default everything is denied.

There are some exceptions to this (for example, the Restricted Ports list - which is hidden, but still effective in standard mode) controls a list of typical system ports that should never be exposed to the internet segment.

"Standard users" will never see, or need to worry about this.

If "Advanced users" want to expose certain ports to the net - they can.

All of OA's lists (black & white) are centrally maintained, and user-overridable. If OA &/or its users find a new service or new "thing" that should be by-default blocked, OA includes that in its updates." }-

[dja2k]

Thanks bellgamin, but I hope you mentioned all that for the rest of the posters as I am a beta tester for all Online Armor versions as well. I am an active tester for the firewall at the moment and I am aware of all the potentials that all Online Armor versions have. :D

dja2k

[lodore]

i have already explained in the past that I am unhappy with the f-secure resource usage and want to try fsis2007 and see if its any better and if it is how much better and lighter. if not i will get antivir suite and either prevx1 or online Armour. i still like kav but im worried it could dont a bad update again. or have they implemented something so it doesnt do that anymore?

[bellgamin]

-{ Quote: "Thanks bellgamin, but I hope you mentioned all that for the rest of the posters as I am a beta tester for all Online Armor versions as well.dja2k" }-I didn't know that. Please correct me if I overlooked or mis-stated any of OA's major capabilities. Also... keep up the good work!:D

[lodore]

i have tested online and quite liked it but as i posted on online Armour forums, they need to put the following software in white list.
fsis2006 and 2007
spysweeper 5.0
maxtor one touch backup software.
I cant remember the rest.
but obviously fsis2006 and 2007 it a must have in the white list.

[dja2k]

Don't worry lodore, don't think the white lists are finished yet, but Mike will get to it. ;)

dja2k

[lodore]

ye i think so. i think there a bit busy on the firewall atm :)
i did read stuff on the forum and they seemed to busy on the firewall

[dja2k]

Yeah you are right, mostly at the moment, number one priority is the firewall.

dja2k

[QBgreen]

Regarding Online Armor, you also should factor in the superior service and support of Mike Nash & crew. Beside the fact that it is an excellent program constantly undergoing improvements. I'm currently running it with CPF, NOD32, and BOClean on a 3.2 ghz. HTP4 w/ 2 gigs of fast RAM. This configuration is not state-of-the-art, and there is no detectable hit on performance. I like to be the one to say yea or nay, so Online Armor works for me. Prevx is a quality product. I installed it on my non-tech wife's machine, (my tech wife doesn't need it! ;D) and breathe easier for it!

[trjam]

I still prefer Prevx1 and Notok provides some valued support here as well.

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Regarding Online Armor, you also should factor in the superior service and support of Mike Nash & crew. Beside the fact that it is an excellent program constantly undergoing improvements. I'm currently running it with CPF, NOD32, and BOClean on a 3.2 ghz. HTP4 w/ 2 gigs of fast RAM. This configuration is not state-of-the-art, and there is no detectable hit on performance. I like to be the one to say yea or nay, so Online Armor works for me. Prevx is a quality product. I installed it on my non-tech wife's machine, (my tech wife doesn't need it! ;D) and breathe easier for it!" }-
Prevx1 is indeed good for non-tech housewives.

One wife isn't natural, two is a crime, so you still need a third one ...
During the day I put softwares in my hardware, at night I do it reversely.

[muf]

-{ Quote: "During the day I put softwares in my hardware, at night I do it reversely." }-

Yep, I know exactly what you mean! And just remember. There's a good selection of ports to choose from! ;)

muf

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Yep, I know exactly what you mean! And just remember. There's a good selection of ports to choose from! ;)

muf" }-
OMG, my hidden dirty joke is revealed and I coded it so well. :'(
Yep, the open ports at night are indeed much better. ;D

[Peter2150]

Lets be careful or the firewall in the sky will close all ports..:lurking:

[bellgamin]

-{ Quote: "I still prefer Prevx1 and Notok provides some valued support here as well." }-The support forum for Prevx (http://www.castlecops.com/c37-Prevx.html) is at CastleCops, not here at Wilders.

[trjam]

-{ Quote: "The support forum for Prevx (http://www.castlecops.com/c37-Prevx.html) is at CastleCops, not here at Wilders." }-

True, but he and I are also both members here to, so....

[Notok]

Any actual support issues are handled privately, Belgamin.

[bellgamin]

-{ Quote: "Any actual support issues are handled privately, Belgamin." }-Some readers might incorrectly interpret trjam's post to mean that Wilders is a Prevx support forum. I just wanted to make it clear that it is NOT.

As far as I know, the only HIPS-types apps officially providing support here at Wilders are Process Guard (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13) & Ghost Security Suite (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=71). I respect that fact and feel that others should do so, too.

[trjam]

-{ Quote: "Some readers might incorrectly interpret trjam's post to mean that Wilders is a Prevx support forum. I just wanted to make it clear that it is NOT.

As far as I know, the only HIPS-types apps officially providing support here at Wilders are Process Guard (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13) & Ghost Security Suite (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=71). I respect that fact and feel that others should do so, too." }-

To me, all products are supported here it would seem, by their users. To many times we have seen vendors interject but the true litmus test is the user. That is what I am. I am a Planner for the Dept. of Transportation and don’t think I have any viable connections to Prevx1, except the 2 paid licenses I bought. No one knocks Don for coming here and giving advice on Kaspersky, and I don’t see a forum heading for them. Or, say Nick and SAS, nope, don’t see a forum heading for them either. But all should be welcome. And if users of Prevx1 want to post questions here, why not. It seems to me it only strengthens this place and the purpose it was created for.

[bellgamin]

-{ Quote: "To me, all products are supported here it would seem, by their users. ...And if users of Prevx1 want to post questions here, why not. It seems to me it only strengthens this place and the purpose it was created for." }-Notok is not merely a *user* -- AFAIK he is a salaried employee of Prevx & a moderator on their forums. While I do not necessarily disagree with what you have said in this post, your earlier post implied that Notok provides support for Prevx via the Wilders forum. Notok himself clarified that matter by stating that he does so via private messages.

[BlueZannetti]

To all:

How about we keep the discussion technically focused and leave questions of moderation and administration of the board to the Moderators and Administrators? Thanks in advance.

Blue

[trjam]

Sorry, in answer to the question, both are good. Why not trial them and see which works for you.