Opinions please

[Motherroad]

I have been thinking of running with no AV. Thinking of going with online armor paid and defensewall and prevx. Think I would be ok with this setup? Mabey do a online scan once in awhile. Thanks.

[kwismer]

-{ Quote: "I have been thinking of running with no AV. Thinking of going with online armor paid and defensewall and prevx. Think I would be ok with this setup? Mabey do a online scan once in awhile. Thanks." }-
i think you're still going to be using anti-virus, you just don't realize it.

i see no reason why you shouldn't be reasonably secure with that setup however (assuming you don't do anything too dumb).

[gery]

prevx is an antivirus my friend hate to disappoint you >:( ;D 8)

[Retadpuss]

if you are sitting behind a NAT router, why not just use the windows firewall and Prevx?

[Someone]

You have more than enough security.

[Motherroad]

Thanks for the opinions. As far as prevx goes have to wonder how good it really is. It may say that they catch all this stuff that the other programs miss but how much does it miss that the other ones catch?

[kwismer]

-{ Quote: "Thanks for the opinions. As far as prevx goes have to wonder how good it really is. It may say that they catch all this stuff that the other programs miss but how much does it miss that the other ones catch?" }-
that is a very good question - good on you for questioning their marketing claims.

[Saraceno]

Sandboxing will provide significant protection, but you still don't know how safe the file/program is you want to keep/recover from the sandbox.

Marketing aside, you're interested in seeing if a program actually works. Others can tell you it does, tests can tell you it works, but you need to see for yourself to be convinced.

Try out the program you're wondering about. I came to the conclusion, right at the moment, it's right up there with the best of them - even more so when you consider its installation size, speed, how low it is on resources, and the level of support you receive.

[Motherroad]

-{ Quote: "Sandboxing will provide significant protection, but you still don't know how safe the file/program is you want to keep/recover from the sandbox.

Marketing aside, you're interested in seeing if a program actually works. Others can tell you it does, tests can tell you it works, but you need to see for yourself to be convinced.

Try out the program you're wondering about. I came to the conclusion, right at the moment, it's right up there with the best of them - even more so when you consider its installation size, speed, how low it is on resources, and the level of support you receive." }-
How do you know it is right up there with the best? Have you done some tests?

[Saraceno]

Just personal tests every now and then. Another person kindly gives me a link with new malware, and I test it with whatever I'm using at the time. Also download and install programs/files from google, the ones being pushed on to users.

Screenshots take time, so I'm not interested in being a tester and seeing my week nights disappear lol But these might be of interest - link 1 (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=244348&page=2) / link 2 (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=232388&page=3). There have been several other user tests if you search for them, all showing a positive result.

I'm no die-hard fan of any product. But does it work? To me, definitely.

But you have to remember, prevx works best not with just a right-click scan, but when you actually run the file. So usually when you think it's missed something, you run the file, and then see it's then detected/blocked.

[Zimzi]

When we are talking about Prevx must have in mind that Prevx is dependent on internet connection. If there is no internet connection there is no much use of Prevx.

So, if you use PC without internet connection (roaming notebook, for example) and does not have installed signature based antivirus (Avira, Avast, AVG, NOD32 etc...), HIPS or similar antimalware software which is not dependent of internet connection, you risking. Put flash memory or CD/DVD in PC, or execute previously downloaded file or archive and your PC can become infected.

IMHO, Prevx is good addition to existing antimalware protection (signature based antivirus and/or HIPS, sandboxing) but would not be a wise choice to use it as the only antimalware software, especially in notebook computers.

Regarding the Prevx detection rate, Prevx is not almighty. Yesterday, I came across hacked webpage with injected Iframe code. Prevx (Prevx 3 Free Detection version) did not recognized infected web page but Avast (Free) did (HTML:Iframe-inf) and blocked access to webpage.

[Motherroad]

I agree on the use with a AV. I have had Avira for a few years now with no infections so no need to really change.

[PrevxHelp]

-{ Quote: "
Regarding the Prevx detection rate, Prevx is not almighty. Yesterday, I came across hacked webpage with injected Iframe code. Prevx (Prevx 3 Free Detection version) did not recognized infected web page but Avast (Free) did (HTML:Iframe-inf) and blocked access to webpage." }-

Prevx does not have an HTTP scanner (really isn't any need for one in our opinion) but if it was to try and infect your system, we would block it :) It is also a question of timing - Avast blocking something would cause it to be blocked to Prevx also.

[Saraceno]

I'm thoroughly behind supporting avast!, but there are times the web scanner is overly sensitive, and blocks a safe page. Nevertheless, I'd rather a program that swayed towards being over-sensitive, than not. And I personally think it's the best web scanner available.

All depends on your setup. Most people have a cable or ADSL2 connection as soon as their system is turned on. Some people still have dialup. Some have hardly any ram and need a light program.

No one program will suit all. So where prevx suits one, avast might suit the other. Where a user is considered a risky user, they could use something like avast and prevx.