What's the best free AV?

[notageek]

Ok I know pay AV's are better (I have NAV and it's a good prog). I would like to know what everyone thinks the best free AV is?

[yodafan]

Hey notageek,

Its probably be AVG...... also fprot for dos is good too.... but again u get wut u pay for. Does ne one have a Free AV Test result done recently?

YODA

[the Tester]

A large majority of posters on forums all over the net seem to favor AVG.But,like yoda says;you get what you pay for.I switched to NOD32 recently and have no regrets,I do have more peace of mind though.LOL

[Paul Wilders]

Agreed with YODA here: AVG and FProt/DOS.

And yes: quality does have a price tag indeed ;)

regards.

paul

[notageek]

Yes you do get what you pay for that's why I bought NAV. LOL... I juat had to find out what free ver. everyone would use if they couldn't get a pay ver. I see that on other boards people are talking highly about AVG. I never tried the prog.

[Gnostic]

I have used AVG for the past six months and am well satisfied with it. It has stopped several virus and script exploits. Its scan engine is relatively fast and it does not seem to give false positives. Their virus signature updates and many and regular. Their support is excellent. I have recommended it to several friends.

Let's make a distinction between those who want a program for free and those who need one through necessity. Usually, the best costs more but sometimes people can only get the best possible free programs.

For now I use AVG. In the future, when I am able, I will probably purchase NOD32.

[Open Source]

go here there is the best free av http://www.gladiator-secure.de/HOME/

[Paul Wilders]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Open Source link=board=19;threadid=3080;start=0#22497 date=1030699438]
go here there is the best free av http://www.gladiator-secure.de/HOME/
" }-

Open Source,

Gladiator is an anti-trojan, and at the moment in very early stages. [/i]Not recommended[/i] as a first line in defense.

regards.

paul

[Open Source]

:-[IM sorry about that I was under the impression that it was a new av hence forth new usually means up to date all other avs that are free are usually abandon ware and extremely out of date.

didnt know it was a Trojan av sorry about that guys next time ill read more closely.

[Technodrome]

F-Prot for DOS PERIOD !


Technodrome

[Paul Wilders]

-{ Quote: "F-Prot for DOS PERIOD" }-

A brand new version??? Never ever heard about the "PERIOD" version.. ;D

regards.

paul

[Technodrome]

;D ;D


Technodrome

[Gnostic]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Gnostic link=board=19;threadid=3080;start=0#21766 date=1030235966]
For now I use AVG.
" }-

Upon further consideration, I use AVG AND F-Prot (DOS) for two-way protection.

[DrSeltsam]

>Agreed with YODA here: AVG and FProt/DOS.

F-Prot ist very very weak. Bad heuristics and very slow offering updates.

I remembered wizards signature in the trojaner-board.de:

"If you think safety is expensive, try an accident!"

[controler]

Well said Andreas ;)

It is human nature to want free but the rule to remember here is

You pay for what you get..

Andreas ? I am very sorry to hear of your illness and hope God may bless you :D

[DrSeltsam]

since i am 11 years (7 years ago) old i "play around" with viruses and malware. f-prot was one of the most powerfull virus scanners. but since 3.x it got worse. very slow scan speed, very slow updates and reaction time, no online packer unpacking and so on.

f-prot has still a very powerfull variant detection based on 2 signatures (a family and a variant signature). but the engine is quite weak. a slow emulation, no unpacking of online compressed files and so on. besides the reaction time between a high outbreak and the ability to update the dos version is very high. in fact it has very serious problems with new malware (detecting and especially cleaning).

if i had to choose i would use trojancheck + antivir pe. antivir has many false positives (by the way, f-prot, too) but updates for new malware are very fast. the emulation is able to handle new malware, too. ok, it can't unpack exe packers :o). trojancheck has a few bugs but is very well to fight against unknown worms and trojans.

[Technodrome]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Andreas Haak link=board=19;threadid=3080;start=0#22863 date=1030950450]
F-Prot ist very very weak. Bad heuristics and very slow offering updates.
" }-

Hmmm... I couldn't agree with you~!


Technodrome

[DrSeltsam]

Ok - created 50 unknown viruses. No one was found. The backdoors and trojans f-prot claims to be suspicious were found using fingerprinting - not using heuristics. Frisk was only too lazy to give them names ;o).

The reaction time of anti vir is about 3 hours if there are no complications. kav needed about 15 minutes and f-prot about 8 hours. all under 1 hour is good - all others bad.

[Technodrome]

Are you talking about DOS or Win Version?


Technodrome

[DrSeltsam]

we talk about free av - and only the dos version is free. the windows version is still a good choice :o).

[Technodrome]

Ok!
I know that DOS version could get a little bit more attention from frisk, but I still think that f-prot dos is the best freeware choice out there!


Technodrome

[wizard]

First of all no one of the available free anti virus scanner is really good. Maybe that is the reason why they are free. ;) I agree with Technodrome that F-Prot for DOS is out of the four the best one. The heuristic is not that bad (by the way Andreas did you check with the /AI switch?).

AntiVirPE has besites the missing packer support other negative issues. No real heurisitic feature. That means even to detect a simple VBS worm the program has to be updated. Also the macro virus detection is bad.

wizard

[notageek]

Wizard all I have to say is that lot of people get a free AV as a second AV. I use Norton as my main and my second AV is AVG6. I was thinking of using f-prot dos but having downloaded it yet. I have been really busy to download it lol.

[Mr.Blaze]

you all wrong the best av is no internet lol

[Technodrome]

-{ Quote: " quoting: MRBLAZE link=board=19;threadid=3080;start=15#23349 date=1031195996]
you all wrong the best av is no internet lol
" }-

You could still get infected by using the internal devices (A:\ F:\) 8)


Technodrome

[notageek]

Well Blaze the real best AV is not having a computer at all. ;D lol.

[Randy_Bell]

These are the free ones I know of:

AntiVir Personal Edition
http://www.free-av.com/

AVAST32 Antivirus
http://www.avast.com/

AVG Anti-Virus System
http://www.grisoft.com/html/us_index.htm

F-Prot Antivirus for DOS
http://www.f-prot.com/products/fpdos.html

Both AVG and F-Prot have excellent reputations. F-Prot is known for its macro virus detection and cleaning abilities. AVG is perhaps best known for its outgoing email scanning (certifying your email to be virus-free).

None of the free products can afford to update their signatures as often as the paid products. Perhaps notageek has the right idea: use a paid product as primary AV, and a free product as a backup. ;D

[wizard]

F-Prot provides daily updates if you download the signature files from a f-secure ftp-server. :)

But I agree a free av cannot replace a commercial one at the moment. And F-Prot for DOS is the perfect second scanner because it works on demand only.

wizard

[trunfa]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Randy_Bell link=board=19;threadid=3080;start=15#25220 date=1032599647]
These are the free ones I know of:

AntiVir Personal Edition
http://www.free-av.com/

AVAST32 Antivirus
http://www.avast.com/

AVG Anti-Virus System
http://www.grisoft.com/html/us_index.htm

F-Prot Antivirus for DOS
http://www.f-prot.com/products/fpdos.html

Both AVG and F-Prot have excellent reputations. F-Prot is known for its macro virus detection and cleaning abilities. AVG is perhaps best known for its outgoing email scanning (certifying your email to be virus-free).

None of the free products can afford to update their signatures as often as the paid products. Perhaps notageek has the right idea: use a paid product as primary AV, and a free product as a backup. ;D
" }-

You didn't mention

Antidote
http://www.vintage-solutions.com/English/Antivirus/Super/Download.html

which although being only a "Detect-only program" can be useful
and

Central Command’s Vexira Antivirus Rescue Disk
http://www.centralcommand.com/

which uses more or less the same definitions of Antivir PE and can be used in Windows XP, instead of Fprot for Dos which doesn't run in Windows XP (it only scans some directories)

[mothman]

-{ Quote: " quoting: the Tester link=board=19;threadid=3080;start=0#20861 date=1029599440]
A large majority of posters on forums all over the net seem to favor AVG.But,like yoda says;you get what you pay for." }-

Personally I have yet to have a bad experience with AVG. If you keep the virus sigs updated, scan your system regularly and implement a heaping dose of healthy paranoia and use both an IDS and firewall, then you are you in good shape. There is nothing wrong with FREE. Just depends on how vigilant you are when using said free product, partcularly when it comes to pc security.

[meneer]

-{ Quote: " quoting: mothman link=board=19;threadid=3080;start=15#57372 date=1051512656]
If you keep the virus sigs updated, scan your system regularly and implement a heaping dose of healthy paranoia and use both an IDS and firewall, then you are you in good shape. There is nothing wrong with FREE. Just depends on how vigilant you are when using said free product, partcularly when it comes to pc security.
" }-

Quite right.
A virus is hardly more then a threat that exploits some vulnerability (system or user ;) related). If you can diminish the risks involved by reducing the number of vulnerabilities, it is not sooo very important which tooling you use. It's just a matter of compensating risks by taking the right measures. And free or not: I feel there is no single best tool.

Touch wood... all the virusses my scanner caught last few years were IE related.
The risk is not the virus, it's the wrong infrastructure... So for real protection 'a heaping dose of healthy paranoia' calls for changing that :)

[pl@y3r]

lol i'd rather pay for AVG and F-Prot than have Norton or Mcafee for free. the latter two AV scanners are completely useless. I can have a trojan passed Norton just by changing a certain U to a u. I can have a trojan past Mcafee just by changing 6 letters with a hex editor. stick to the free ones mcafee and norton are useless!

[Peaches4U]

Hmmm, I turfed AVG because it was always late in getting new updates even though I had configured to check for updates daily. Even manually, it would not download the current available update. Soooo, I am giving Avast a try. So far so good, except for a one time false positive warning.
http://www.smiliegenerator.de/s23/smilies-44069.png

[Magica]

I use AntiVir Personal Edition and I pretty like it. Although there was Norton on this pc initially, I unistalled it.

[c0ltran3]

Why nobody spoke about BitDefender Free and Avast?

[Cochise]

-{ Quote: "Why nobody spoke about BitDefender Free and Avast?" }-

Exactly....I have now got BitDefender and Avast (Both d/loaded to-day after a little bit of a wake-up call with 'Bagle O' that had somehow got itself involved in a couple of photographs and wouldn't let me send in email without my server stopping them in their tracks......had me scratching my head for a bit 'til Snapdragin came to my aid. Also use AVG....all brilliant...and free.

Cochise, 8)

[MikeBCda]

I use avast (home) too -- upgrades are quite frequent, "normally" two or three times a week but I've seen 2 or even 3 the same day if there's a flood of new things hitting the net.

And support is top-notch, quite active forums in which participation ranges from the Alwil team themselves down to folks who got their first-ever computer last Christmas, and just about every level of experience and expertise in between.

[Pigman]

AVG is too much of a RAM hog for my crappy old computer to handle.

I use AntiVir as a primary AV program. Antivir doesn't have much when it comes to heuristics, though, so if it ever seems that something has gotten past it, I run a scan with F-Prot for DOS.

Maybe I'll eventually dish out some money for F-Prot for Windows. Then I won't have to have AntiVir for resident protection.

[nadirah]

I find Norton Antivirus 2003 not bad too. Does a good job too. I just find the subscirption service for Norton antivirus not necessary. Wonder why symantec put in this subscription thing for. Probably they wanna make more money.

[ghodgson]

I have 2 machines, on my old one with Win98SE I uninstalled Norton AV because of the subscription, and installed AVG. However, the resident boot up check kept crashing my Machine and I couldnt even get into SAFEMODE. It took me a week to sort out. Eventually I uninstalled AVG and installed AVAST........................wonderful. No problems at all. Has anybody else had this problem with AVG??
My newer machine with XP had Norton NIS and AV pre installed so I have stuck with that, but I see the file size is about 125 MB for both. Too much for my liking.
Gordon ::)

[Pigman]

I've heard that Panda is putting out a free antivirus program again... you might want to check it out. Just beware of false alarms, though. (Apparently the heuristics aren't top-notch.)

[DARTH_SEPHIROTH]

I have Been using Anti-vir for a Year nearly Now and I have had No problem with it exept 1 and that is that whenever i change to another window it will crash and I will have to restart the prog and start again but other than that its kept my comp quite safe sooo a thumbs up to Anti-Vir:D

[slammer_JvA]

-{ Quote: "Quite right.

The risk is not the virus, it's the wrong infrastructure... So for real protection 'a heaping dose of healthy paranoia' calls for changing that :)" }-
Second that.
And André, may I say: what a wonderful way of expressing - must remember that one! :);D

grtz
Slammer

[meneer]

-{ Quote: "Second that.
And André, may I say: what a wonderful way of expressing - must remember that one! :);D

grtz
Slammer" }-
Thanks ;D but I wish that I was that fluent in English. I surely quoted it from someone else? ;)

[Technical]

Technodrome, don't you think that F-Prot for Dos updates are a little bit difficult?

[Firefighter]

As this poll seems not to outline On-Demand snanners out, Please, if u really know better free scanner than eScan Free,

http://www.mwti.net/antivirus/free_utilities.asp

tell me immediately.

eScan Free has Kaspersky engine and is also capable to scan those riskware nasties that Kaspersky is only able to do with extended update settings.

It has only two weaknessies in my mind;

1. u need a broadband connection, because the program can't update, so u must download that updated version every time u scan.

2. The size of those scanned files is limited (if I remember right, u are able to scan files that are less than 1 Mb).

The extra plus in eScan Free is also that, eScan is able to delete those infected archived files as a whole or rename those infected ones. Very useful if u are scanning infected archived samples colletions, the rest u have in your infected folder after a scan, are those that eScan wasn't able to detect as infected. Why to scan infected archives? Different av:s are reporting the number of infections differently, when you scan infected archives, all scanners are reporting those zipped files about the same way.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

[c0ltran3]

-{ Quote: "As this poll seems not to outline On-Demand snanners out, Please, if u really know better free scanner than eScan Free,

http://www.mwti.net/antivirus/free_utilities.asp

tell me immediately.

eScan Free has Kaspersky engine and is also capable to scan those riskware nasties that Kaspersky is only able to do with extended update settings.

It has only two weaknessies in my mind;

1. u need a broadband connection, because the program can't update, so u must download that updated version every time u scan.

2. The size of those scanned files is limited (if I remember right, u are able to scan files that are less than 1 Mb).

The extra plus in eScan Free is also that, eScan is able to delete those infected archived files as a whole or rename those infected ones. Very useful if u are scanning infected archived samples colletions, the rest u have in your infected folder after a scan, are those that eScan wasn't able to detect as infected. Why to scan infected archives? Different av:s are reporting the number of infections differently, when you scan infected archives, all scanners are reporting those zipped files about the same way.

Best regards,
Firefighter!" }-



Escan has Kaspersky engine but Escan free is not Kaspersky Antivirus. I used Escan free but it missed somthing and had false positive.

[c0ltran3]

@Firefighter

There aren't any tests about eScan free. In other posts I read that you made insteresting studies about antivirus (i.e. Claim Antivirus). Is there anything on eScan free, too?

Regards

[Firefighter]

To c0ltran3 from Firefighter!

Don't worry about eScan, just scanned my 1375 infected archived samples collection. EScan 4.2.4 detected 1272, when KAV 5.0.121 missed one that eScan detected (eScan won!),

cyn2.0.zip->EdtSrv.exe is infected with Backdoor:Win32/Cyn.2_0

by RAV online scan.

OK, it was editserver, but anyway, no bigger problems with eScan!

The best not KAV engined av scored 1183, BitDefender 7.2 Free, ClamWin scored 931.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

[c0ltran3]

@Firefighter: Thank you I'm really surprised of the results of your tests. In the past I used eScan free for some months but I wasn't satisfied.

[RejZoR]

avast! Home Edition all the way in the field of free AVs. I found AntiVir to be pretty good too,but it lacks mail scanner,so its useless compared to full featured avast! HE. AVG6 is so old now it doesn't deserve to be mentioned anymore. AVG7 is a total different story,but its not free :P

[webster]

I agree with Firefighter about E-scan. Its ability to find hidden malware, is amazing. Recently it found a toolbar, deep, deep down in Firefox :o . Yes, Firefox. I thougt it was a false positive, but no, it was there ??? >:( . A toolbar from a screensaver i didn´t install, because it was bundled with Newnet. This must have sneeked out before installation, i suspect. E-scan is my first choice for a second opinion 8) .

[notageek]

e scan catches spyware? Wow that's news to me. Didn't you scan with SpybotS&D or Adaware? ZEven Bazooka would scan for some that the other 2 wouldn't find.

[webster]

Spysweeper and Adaware didn´t detect it. E-scan detected it as "Adv Ware Toolbar", but didn´t delete it. E-scan use the extended KAV signatures, i guess it includes some spyware 8) . It also detects a lot of useless tools :) .

[notageek]

Cool Maybe I'll check it out.

[Ronin]

-{ Quote: "I agree with Firefighter about E-scan. Its ability to find hidden malware, is amazing. Recently it found a toolbar, deep, deep down in Firefox :o .

That's a interesting claim, more details plese. What was it called? What effects did it have, how did you remove it etc...

[webster]

A file, 2,300 kb. found somewere in Firefox´s profiles folder, carried the name of the screensaver. It didn´t do anything. I think it needed some other files to work. I deleted it whith supershredder. Why are you so interested in this, if i may ask ?

[webster]

It was not over. My new F-Secure AV found this, in the same directory
C:\Documents and Settings\user\Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\default.uvi\Cache\3B3A07EBd01 Inficering: Exploit.HTML.Mht

[f123]

That's the FF's cache folder. You must have picked up something while surfing.

F.

[webster]

Yes, you are right. I didn´t notice, i am sleepy :-[ . This thing is designed to use a hole in explorer, to download malware. It didn´t work in Firefox, i guess.

[nadirah]

For a free AV i would recommend avast antivirus home edition.

[gerardwil]

I wonder how the average home user is able to judge which is the best free AV? I mean apart from what is written in the magazines and tests, otherwise this topic is overdone.
I am sure my AV is the worst around because it didn't catch a whole lot of crap. But I am happy because there isn't any virus on my pc.
Ofcourse I checked that, ;D
A more to the point question would be: How to setup your AV ('s) to keep your machine free from nasties?

[Ronin]

-{ Quote: "A file, 2,300 kb. found somewere in Firefox´s profiles folder, carried the name of the screensaver. It didn´t do anything. I think it needed some other files to work. I deleted it whith supershredder. Why are you so interested in this, if i may ask ?" }-

Because of your claim that you found a toolbar deep deep down in Firefox.
It implied to me that the toolbar malware was somehow installed and running in Firefox.

AFAIK that isn't very likely, unless you found something new.

There are XPI installs that bundle IE hijackers, and host file redirects but what you wrote seem to imply something more than that.

But anyhow if it's in the cache that's nothing special. I found lots of JS.Scob.Trojan early this month too when Etrust was scanning.

Totally harmless to Firefox.

[Ronin]

-{ Quote: "I wonder how the average home user is able to judge which is the best free AV? I mean apart from what is written in the magazines and tests, otherwise this topic is overdone.
" }-

I wonder how the average Wilders member is able to judge which is the best free AV? I mean apart from what is written in these forums and on test sites, otherwise this topic is overdone.

[bigc73542]

Well the replies that I post about av programs here at wilders are backed by the experience of having used almost any antivirus program you can name. And there are a lot of members that inter change information on av programs that they have used with the other members. And with that knowledge and the info that they pick up in there own testing of these programs the members pick up a pretty good knowledge of the programs they use and have trialed and they don't hesitate to share that knowledge to anyone that is willing to listen and learn. ;) The members at wilders are a collective of knowledge that is here to be shared with all people.

cheers bigc

[Ronin]

-{ Quote: "Well the replies that I post about av programs here at wilders are backed by the experience of having used almost any antivirus program you can name. And there are a lot of members that inter change information on av programs that they have used with the other members. And with that knowledge and the info that they pick up in there own testing of these programs the members pick up a pretty good knowledge of the programs they use and have trialed and they don't hesitate to share that knowledge to anyone that is willing to listen and learn. ;) The members at wilders are a collective of knowledge that is here to be shared with all people.

cheers bigc" }-

So could the collective knowledge of Wilders tell me what's best?
Once informed, I can go tell all the magazines and reviews of the true ,correct answer and nobody need to waste time on debating this issue again. :)

[dog]

-{ Quote: "So could the collective knowledge of Wilders tell me what's best?
Once informed, I can go tell all the magazines and reviews of the true ,correct answer and nobody need to waste time on debating this issue again. :)" }-

Super AV Plus ... by Netsky Labs ... LOL ;D Hands Down

Sorry ... couldn't resist :-X :lurking:

[bigc73542]

Well that is where the catch is, there is no one best antivirus. What there is are a collection of av programs that all work differently on every computer. That makes it impossible to pin it down to one single product. What is recomended is that you trial several antivirus programs to find the one that works best on your machine. There are enough av's out there so you should be able to find one that works fast smooth and virtually trouble free with minimum maintainace. And if you want to contact the magazines and reviewers and inform them of my answer to your question please knock yourself out. But they will still write there reviews and sell there magazines with out any regard to my opinions. Which doesn't bother me in the slightest.

regards
bigc

[ronjor]

-{ Quote: "Super AV Plus ... by Netsky Labs ... LOL ;D Hands Down

Sorry ... couldn't resist :-X :lurking:" }-


Dog

Where can I download this program? Catchy name! 8)

[dog]

-{ Quote: "Dog

Where can I download this program? Catchy name! 8)" }-

LOL ... Badguy.com ;D :-X

[ronjor]

Well, I went to badguy.com and couldn't find it!!! ;D

http://www.badguy.com/

[dog]

-{ Quote: "Well, I went to badguy.com and couldn't find it!!! ;D

hxxp://www.badguy.com/" }-

Oppps ... before I'm sued ;) ;D

My reference to badguy.com was not in reference to the actual site badguy.com (who knew it actual existed ... and a health site at that) ... it was only used in reference to the coined term; a reference malware sites. No offense intended to the owners of the said site.

~dog running from laywers~ LOL :lurking: ~hiding out~

[ronjor]

-{ Quote: "Oppps ... before I'm sued ;) ;D

My reference to badguy.com was not in reference to the actual site badguy.com (who knew it actual existed ... and a health site at that) ... it was only used in reference to the coined term; a reference malware sites. No offense intended to the owners of the said site.

~dog running from laywers~ LOL :lurking: ~hiding out~" }-


I don't think anyone is coming after you. You could probably put any words together and find a web site.
Of course, we all know lawyers have no sense of humor.

Ron--hiding from lawyers! ;D

[Ronin]

-{ Quote: "Well that is where the catch is, there is no one best antivirus. What there is are a collection of av programs that all work differently on every computer. That makes it impossible to pin it down to one single product." }-

Exactly.

-{ Quote: "What is recomended is that you trial several antivirus programs to find the one that works best on your machine." }-

Again agreed. But if this is the recommended method (ie trying it yourself), what use is reading reviews, posts on forums such as this? EgEveryone can tell me that NOD is resource light, but if it brings my machine to a crawl, what use is it?


-{ Quote: "And if you want to contact the magazines and reviewers and inform them of my answer to your question please knock yourself out. But they will still write there reviews and sell there magazines with out any regard to my opinions. Which doesn't bother me in the slightest.

regards
bigc" }-

Unfortunately if I was running one of those reviews, I wouldn't print your answer either, since it's pretty much common sense.

People can give you advise for all they are worth but there is no substitute for trying them out yourself.

But then we come back to a full circle, since we then have to decide based on how own testing what is best. And this is the same problem faced by anyone Wilders member or mere mortals.

[bigc73542]

We are mortals, all we can do is offer our experience to possibly shorten the list of av's to try due to a wide knowledge base of av's that seem to work better that the average. In that way we might be of assistance in helping to point you in a direction where there are possibly the better choices in the av sector. But again the final choice is up to the user to choose one that works best for them. We are not miracle workers but we are able to give assistance through knowledge and experience. And in most instances that is suffeciant to solve most problems that arise.


bigc

[webster]

Two of your friends use Norton AV, and they have never seen a virus. Hey, thats good, i will buy that. But come to Wilders, and take a look at some of the posts concerning this AV, and you will know what many users think of this, and you might make another choice. Thats what it´s all about, i think.

[notageek]

This post was and is about the best free AV in everyones opinion. Not a "I checked the reviews and I thing AVG is thew best becuase of the reviews" type of post. I just want to know what everyone thought of the best free AV. This post wasn't a post for people to bicker about what this post is for. There really isn't much Free avs to look at and say which best in your own opinion.

[sweater]

;)

If you talked about free A/v then I think it's AVAST! Home Edition antivirus... its the best I have ever known. It has many features not found on other A/V... best of all it has WebShield and Network Shield that acts like an invisible firewall to protect us even more from viruses and worms etc...
:)

[jon123]

Any new opinions on this subject? (seeing as how this thread is a year old, except for sweater's post)

Also I'm wondering if having spywareguard and Zone Alarm running would cause problems for an AV prog.

One other thing, it seems I might have a problem with coolwwwsearch as occasionally ZA is catching a connection attempt (routed to 127~, loopback right?), any recommendations on dealing with that? I ran spysweeper 3.5 without success. Currently I'm using a cloned backup that hasn't had spysweeper installed.

[WSFuser]

jon123, for ur first question, there shouldnt be ay problems. for coolwebsearch, download teh cwshredder utility and run it. also use spybot s&d and run the immunization and also scan using it.

anyways for me, avast home is my preferred free AV. it offer plenty of options and cool modules like the http-scanner. the detection rates arent half bad either.

[Brian N]

I've tried all of them in my days.
AntiVir with their "Luke filewalker".. It's probably a good antivirus app, but I find it very hard to consider them as a serious company just because they use that in their scanner.

AVG is sweet - Sad news is, they still use this very old interface and thei detection rate has been dropping like crazy over the past year. This was infact my favorite free AV at the time.

Avast! is a nice AV-program too, but the 'skin' feature made me thin they were just like Antivir - A group of un-serious AV developers. Now it's a different story. Avast! has evolved alot to be one of the most popular free AV's out there, and I really like it, but it has limitations - It's good enough for the average user with the slider settings, but a more experienced user will look for something else.

My 2c

[jon123]

cwshredder, best place to donload?
ty guys

I found this site (http://www.spywareinfoforum.com/~merijn/downloads.html) which recommends using PepiMKs tool...

"There is a variant of the Coolwebsearch trojan spreading that closes several anti-spyware apps when you try to open them.
If this is happening to you, download PepiMK's CoolWWWSearch.SmartKiller removal tool first and run it. After it does its job, CWShredder and HijackThis will run properly (as well Spybot S&D, Ad-aware and several anti-spyware forums)."

[WSFuser]

this is teh right link (www.intermute.com/spysubtract/cwshredder_download.html)

[Omicron]

I use AntiVIr

[jon123]

Have posted in "Other Security Issues"

ok update to my coolwwsearch prob.

ran f-prot for dos with updates and full options (was not slow btw)-nadda

ran Pepi's smartkiller, older version though for cool~ v1 and v2-nadda
ran cwshredder-nadda

installed avast free and ran-nadda

have had one more instance of ZA catching outbound destination coolwwsearch

will of course try latest smartkiller, is there any diff. to prog?
what else might I try?
-I left Tea Timer running S&Dv1.3 (does the 1.4dl now include latest engine and det. files?)
I also wonder if MS sec updates for 98 might be causing issue for any of these progs.

[SmokeItGood]

Who's that strange looking guy in profile smoking a joint?

[trojan]

alternatives to free avg

http://www.clamwin.com/ <<clamwin
http://www.avast.com/eng/down_home.html <<avast
http://www.free-av.com/ <<antivir

[bryankr]

Hi,

I have been a long time user of AVG Free adition and have been pleased.

bryankr

[Phant0m]

Before making a choice, I ask myself some questions, some of the questions are;

• Detection rate
• Features offered
• Technical Support availability
• Product Popularity

It may seem I’m especially choosy, when some may think you shouldn’t when using Freeware, but I believe that I should not be mislead, and giving me a false sense of security.


- Features offered
If I’m looking for a primary Anti-Virus system, it definitely has to have real-time resident protection, which also includes E-mail scanning, web-content scanning and scanning for download protocols at minimum…

And if there’s going to be real-time resident protection, a file Exclude feature is absolute must. And this is something where probably all popular AV systems fail at, these FREE AVs leaves this vital feature out, and in doing so leaving out very beneficial feature, an solution to conflicts, an extensive PC/Internet performance decrease depending on software users runs.

I personally feel so strong about this lack of ability in FREE AVs (like AVG Free), I’d not use or recommend a FREE AV (UNLESS) they were planning to use it merely for the On-Demand Scan capabilities.


- Technical Support availability
I think any FREE AV (like AVG Free) that doesn’t offer technical support is not worth recommending and using the product. But ‘Product Popularity’ may swing a person’s decision here..

-{ Quote: "I wonder how the average Wilders member is able to judge which is the best free AV? I mean apart from what is written in these forums and on test sites, otherwise this topic is overdone." }-

[Brandon]

I would choose AntiVir for a free av, because it provides free support over at castlecops, has the best detection rate over the 3 free avs, has the standard features(paid has adware/spyware detection), and it is a popular av to use.

Regards,

Brandon

[Arup]

Avast free features mail scanning, web scanning as well as real time scan, P2P module and IM module, also a sort of IPS in form of network protection, all this for free, can't be beat. There are others who offer these features but you have to pay for them. Support for free and paid avast is available at forum.avast.com

[Trooper]

I agree with Arup. While I do not use it myself, Avast is the best "free" av software that I have used. I always recommend it to folks who are looking for a freebie as well. ;)

[Phant0m]

Sorry Brandon O, I’m with Arup on this one, I just begin using Avast! Free already I’m luving It.. As Arup mentioned, it does cover many aspects, and regarding Adware/Spyware detections, I’m more then happy to have just my AS Real-Time Resident Protection handling these.

What I see for features and how it handling on my system, I simply don’t see other free AVs I’ve tested comparing to these aspects.

I hadn’t used AntiVir personally, I did gather bit information about it just doesn’t interest me, doesn’t catch my eye like Avast! Free does.

[Arup]

Anti Vir free is good, but it offers nothing as compared to free Avast, no mail scanning or for that any other module, by the way, Anti Vir Pro only offers mail scanning, nothing else. The other problem is the huge updates of Anti Vir from their slow servers, a pain if you are on dial up. The only advantage of Anti Vir is its extremely low resource consumption, however in these days of 1GB memory, Avast is a small price to pay considering the protection offered.

[Brandon]

-{ Quote: " Anti Vir Pro only offers mail scanning, nothing else." }-

AntiVir Premium offers adware/spyware detection also.

-{ Quote: "Sorry Brandon O, I’m with Arup on this one, I just begin using Avast! Free already I’m luving It.. As Arup mentioned, it does cover many aspects, and regarding Adware/Spyware detections, I’m more then happy to have just my AS Real-Time Resident Protection handling these.

What I see for features and how it handling on my system, I simply don’t see other free AVs I’ve tested comparing to these aspects.

I hadn’t used AntiVir personally, I did gather bit information about it just doesn’t interest me, doesn’t catch my eye like Avast! Free does." }-

Yeah avast does offer lots of different modules which AntiVir doesnt and its also free. I just dont like the icon and the interface avast has.

Regards,

Brandon

[Phant0m]

Hi Brandon O

You don’t have an option to change Icons used? You don’t like anything that is offered for skins which are offered by default Install or any skins available at the site?

The Avast! Interface, you mean the On-Demand Scanning interface?

[.:X:M:A:S:.]

avast! Home is the winner for me ;D

[TeknO]

The answer of "What's the best free AV?" is http://img431.imageshack.us/img431/815/antivir8uz.jpg

[wildman]

::) No secret that I have been all over the place trying to find the best "free" virus protection program. I have once again settled for AVG. This is my take on some of them. The technical stuff, I leave to the experts to explain, and I am not an expert.

(A) AntiVir/Classic. The server(S) used to maintain this one are flatly abysmal. The updates are quiet often large. The company behind this product apparently does not support it either.

(B) AVAST. Bloated as far as I was concerned. System ran like driving ones automobile with the hand break on. Boot up was significantly slower than with any of the other "free" ones that I had installed. Using the on-line scan requires a fair amount of computer knowledge, that I am not sure all posses.

(C) AVG. Easy to use and maintain. Limited in the ability to chose ones own options. Don't know about the detection thing, I think that depends upon whom one listens to. My son-in-law has this one installed on the machine my grandkids use, and has had no problems, and this has been on that machine since the days of version 6.0. Two teenage boys use this machine by the way, that should be a fair test for any virus protection program don't you think?

(D) BitDefender. I could never get this one down loaded and installed, so do not have an opinion of it other than that.

Thanks
Wildman
:) :D

[RejZoR]

I still don't get it how can you say that avast! is bloated ???
Bloated means you get antivirus including firewall,popup blocker,privacy control,dog walker and babysitter all in one.
People really have to clear up what "bloated" means...

You can't say a product with more settings and tweaks is bloated just because well it has more settings to adjust. Thats not bloat,thats configuration level...

[wildman]

-{ Quote: "I still don't get it how can you say that avast! is bloated ???
Bloated means you get antivirus including firewall,popup blocker,privacy control,dog walker and babysitter all in one.
People really have to clear up what "bloated" means...

You can't say a product with more settings and tweaks is bloated just because well it has more settings to adjust. Thats not bloat,thats configuration level..." }-

bloat: swell, puff up. Unnecessary, nothing to enhance the capability of the virus protection program. Nothing more than eye candy. I think I have figured out that individuals want AVAST to be a catch all do all program, I don't think that is practical in todays computer world, at least not for just one program.

Thanks
Wildman

[Phant0m]

Avast! Free is the only Anti-Virus System comes even close to being complete Anti-Virus system, in comparison to other free AVs currently circulating around the net.

Everything for features Avast! Free offers are what I consider necessity and what an AV should offer, may be for some difficult to comprehend different features offered, and it is completely configurable unlike AVG Free.

Avast! also offers technical support, AVG Free does not (“No Technical support”) http://www.grisoft.com/filedir/presale/cmpsheets/mm_pfp_cmp_us_1_20050726.pdf

As for bloatware, well let’s compare file-size, and you can compare features offered between AVG Free and Avast! Free…

Avast! Home_setupeng.exe – 9.27MB
avg70free_344a618.exe – 12.7MB

:P

[RejZoR]

Not to mention everything is optional (providers).
It works just fine even with default settings (install and forget), but if you want to adjust it exactly as you want and the thos extra settings come in handy.

You don't like the spinning of "a" ball next to the clock? Turn it off.
Don't like the sounds? You can turn them off or even record your own and use them in avast!. Don't like the update popups? Hell, you can turn these off too. You don't like your AV to be asking you for every infected file? Set Silent Mode and leave it auto Quarantine infected the files for you (very usefull when you use it kids PC to make it fully silent and automated).
You want more thorough scanning without knowing the details? Just move the slider from Normal to High sensitivity.
Don't like the pre-bundled skins? Download one of many different skins on www.avast.com, use skinless (Windows style) skin or even create your own.

Removing features won't improve anything (perfromance and memory usage wise) and will only cripple avast!. When i look back to AVG and AntiVir i remember they don't have any exclusion options. Pretty dumb. Silent mode? Nope,you have to click each and every time when popup shows. Updating? Almost non existent or very limited with only one update check per day (AVG) or with completely manual updating (AntiVir). Now do you think people really want that kind of antivirus? avast! will work just fine with default settings and later when people get to know all the extra goodies they will adjust it even further exactly as they want it to. Don't know what that fature does? Read the help file and if you still don't understand, head to friendly avast! forums and we'll certanly help you explain. Thats why i see removing of features to be a very bad decision (crippling AV instead of explaining what something does).

[Phant0m]

RejZoR, your right, and about removing features, because user or users sees features in software that they don’t comprehend or understand entirely, or don’t see other products alike share in common, they are quick to slap it as bloatware and quick to state it is unnecessary to have this and that…

[toploader]

i chose AVG from day one - it's missed one or two things and it's found one or two things. i've been tempted to try the other freebies to see if they are any better but having read the feedback on these forums have decided to stick with it. however i don't rely on it 100% - every so often i use the Kaspersky online scan as a second opinion. it doesn't offer removal options but if it finds anything i remove it manually. i don't use ICQ, P2P or Messengers, only use webmail and NEVER open attachments (except if i'm using an internet cafe) so worms and viruses are not such a problem. trojans are not AVG's long suit so that's why i use Kaspersky as backup.

[wildman]

??? O.k., as I have stated numerous times now, I am no technical expert, but why do I read from others (and had the same experience) that AVAST is like driving your automobile with the hand break on? Why is it the one that took the longest to boot up? Why is this the one that has slowed down the function of my machine significantly? I have not experienced any of this with the other two "free" products that I have tried. It is for these reasons that AVAST is once more off my computer.

And now for the big question: What is the purpose and function of a virus protection program? Does AVAST need everything it currently has to accomplish and fulfill that purpose and function? Anything over and above this is nothing more than clutter as far as I am concerned.

Thanks
Wildman
:o :P

[RejZoR]

Wildman,you have some serious issues with your PC... (perfromance wise).

[WSFuser]

if u just want a simple resident scanner than maybe avast isnt for you. it has a total of 7 providers and the pro version also has a script blocker and the enhanced interface which gives u even more options for tweaking. neways i think i already voted for avast, so now i repeat for emphasis.

[RejZoR]

Well you can always use just 3 basic providers (Standard,Network and Web Shields). All others are more or less optional.

[Phant0m]

I not that long ago had AVG Free installed and now Avast! Free…

AVG Free 7.0 - avast! Home 4.6.691

I had chance to experiment with the both most recent versions of these products before I had based my opinion and faith…

With my machine running Windows XP, I saw different regarding what one actually significantly ran my machine slower, and what AV actually took the longest to boot up...

I also don’t see how Avast! Free is difficult considering, you install, and it uses recommended settings by default, and I find Avast! even more convenient/comprehendible when configuring in comparison to AVG ‘’limited’’ controls.

Also for the record, I'm using Avast! Free with everything on High (…, Scan All Files) and everything working smoothly…
Just ‘Scan All Files’ feature alone, I like to see you activate it in AVG Free and see how well she plays for Resident protection, see my Sept 17th post, http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=97942.

When it comes down to it, we are happy to see you satisfied with whatever makes you feel most comfortable, and secure, that is all what really matters. :)

[FastGame]

-{ Quote: "Wildman,you have some serious issues with your PC... (perfromance wise)." }-
I agree, but I think its more psychological than anything, I have a neighbor that once was that way.

True story- My neighbor has run avast! for over a year without any problems, one day he ask me whats another good AV to try. I asked him whats wrong with avast! ? his reply was he'd read some reviews and they said avast! was a bloated hog that slowed the PC down, he told me he noticed his PC was slow and took forever to boot and open files.

I told the guy hold on, let me see whats wrong with the PC first. I checked the PC and nothing was wrong, but I did perform a speed tweak to avast! before giving him the PC back. I told him the HD needed a defrag and I tweaked avast!. He swore his PC was zippy fast afterwards and thanked me for helping him. That was 4 months ago and he's still happy with avast! and the speed of his PC.

His PC is a Intel Celeron 800mhz, 384mb ram, Windows XP Home.

Oh almost forgot, the speed tweak for avast! ? I turned the blue ball off so it wouldn't spin. :)

[toxical2004]

Ok, i'll try to give you some advice regarding your question about AVs. Let's try to sum up my experiences and thoughts about those three most popular ones (and to be impartial to maximum extent):
1)AVAST home- a)pros: This is probably the most complete AV package available for free, and works very well with the default settings. It also has nice modular architecture,which means you don't have to install features you think wouldn't be of use,for example P2P protection if you don't use it. Almost every task can be 'automated', so you won't have to fiddle with updating and maintaing it. Updates are small in size,and on a pretty regular basis (about three times a week). Detectionvise, it's not bad, and the plus is it also has (limited) spyware scanning capability.
b)cons: avast! seems to be a little bit of a resource hog (provided you're using a 1-1.5 ghz processor, with 512 mb of ram configuration,or something like that). It also does not have ANY kind of heuristic scanning for malware, and often misses 'rare and exotic' viruses. It's 'network shield' is pretty much useless if you're using a decent firewall,since it's not a real IDS.
So,to sum it up, avast is a decent av, and can be valuable for someone who doesn't want to set everything up manually and watch for every aspect of maintainig the program (or someone who does not have the knowledge, like eg. my grandmother..). It's the most "install and forget" you can get for free. For users who don't surf those software cracking and porn sites,and do not share files, it can easily be ideal solution.
2)AntiVir - a)pros: extremely light on resources. Of all the free real time scanners, it has ABSOLUTELY the BEST detection rate. It also DOES have a decent heuristics (examples: it found my keyloggers log viewer [which wasn't detected by kaspersky,only the main program file] after it unninstalled it,and also i also tried with my friend who is a bit of "internet bully" to send me something from his collection of remote admin tools/exotic backdoors and such crap- and it found every pice:some by definition, and some by heuristics as HEURISTIC/Backdoor,Keylogger, so it definitely has a DECENT heuristic scanning capability!). Definitions are regular,and on a daily basis (used the beta ver with incr. VDF updating)
b)cons: AntiVir is pretty ugly-looking program, and it feels a bit unfinished. It does not have real time mail scanning (which i don't think is too much important,since the on access scanner would catch the virus during the opening of the attachment). Most importantly, their update servers are not very reliable, and usually can't be accessed during certain periods of the day, when the traffic is high (but if you go to the internet mostly during night,it shouldn't be a problem). One more thing is that when there is a program update (the program itself,not the definitions), all the settings are back to default values every time,and need to be adjusted again; and you can exclude files only from the on-demand scan.Also, updating cannot be done automatically, only manually.
So, AntiVir is not by any means 'a toy' program,and detectionvise,it's the most powerful of all these three (that's why i'm using it ;D ), but it can be a real pain in the a** for an average user who likes 'install and forget' solutions and doesn't have much time to deal with constant updating and re-setting it from time to time.
3)AVG- a)pros: relatively light on resources,and the settings can be adjusted quite easily (also not bad with default settings). Updates are on a daily basis and are small in size. Not very fancy-looking one (neither is antivir),but everything can be set up easily and it has almos all the usual features an average user needs.
b)cons: Of these three, it has probably the worst detection rate. If you have read it's help files,you have probably read about it's three-way heuristic (code comparing, virtual emulation of files,and checksum checking),and said "Wow, this sounds better than NOD32!!". And all those three-way 'guessing it's a virus' things do absolutely nothing (belive me, i got many nasty crap while using it, and it didn't even report some of these stuff as being suspicious). Updates are regular,it's true,but every one contains only a couple of virus signatures, usually three of four; and of course,they suck in response times during some large outbreaks (even a days matter or so).
As for this AV, i wouldn't recommend it to anyone,except maybe to people with dialup connections who rarely go online and surf only local news and check emails. On the other hand,it's quite simple to use,and usually everything is hassle-free regarding maintaining and updating.

As for free,on demand scanners, i haven't tried many,but i can surely say that bitdefender's free av is SURELY and ABSOLUTELY the best, since it has really stellar performance,huge malware database,and can find practically 99% of all the crap you can have on your computer (similar to the famous kaspersky,only with no real time scanning).
One more thing, since neither of those free av's are not very good with finding adware/spyware, they should be used in conjunction with realtime AS scanners (like spybot, or MS antispyware) to give a complete crap-ware protection package.Also, apart of that , you could use one of the free on access scanners (bd free for example),or run those online av scans,just to be sure you're still clean,or if you suspect something.
After all this, my recommendation would be : AntiVir (if you like to manually update during night....it's not all that scary,belive me ;D ),or avast! if you need a more complete, 'install to my grandma and forget' package; together with a real time AS scanner (either spybot or MS AS will do just fine)" and of course,a decent firewall of your choice. Others may advise different, so read thoroughly through all the replies, but i tried to be as impartial as possible and to give some sort of "sum-up" of the programs that are discussed about on over 5 pages of replies.
Cheers!

[YeOldeStonecat]

You hardly see CAI's EZAntivirus listed....it's free for 1 year for Microsoft customers.

[wildman]

-{ Quote: "Wildman,you have some serious issues with your PC... (performance wise)." }-

I wouldn't say that. AVAST was the only one, repeat only one to have shown significant degradation to my computers performance. I should tell that I do use dial-up, and this plays a major part in my consideration.

I will agree, what ever works for an individual is o.k., but do not take some ones word for it, try all of the "free" ones for a while, and then decided which one fits your needs best. This is what I did, so I think I was fair about the entire process.

I also do not use just one program for protection, but rather a combination of six different types. There are some individuals who utilize a great deal more than this number by the way.

Thanks
Wildman

[toploader]

so what's the deal on running both AVG and Antivir concurrently? should there be any conflicts? and if so why? or is it just a resource and performance issue?

is there an option to install antivir as on-demand only?

[Trespasser]

I've tried all of the top free three and by far Avast! was the best. It did use what I'd term "alot" of ram, if you totaled all the running devices associated with Avast!, but to be honest I was surprised by how light it felt on my computer (very light). I was also impressed with AntiVir (the newest version). It updated easily and the new interface was a pleasant change from past versions, but because it doesn't scan incoming email I uninstalled it after a day or two. Nothing to report on AVG other than being unimpressed (why consider AVG when Avast! or AntiVir are available). BTW, I'm on dialup, as well.

[toploader]

in answer to my own question i found this (http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:eh8_pJVPyzIJ:sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3Ffile%3D/chronicle/archive/2005/09/12/BUGIBEL8N71.DTL+running+2+anti+virus&hl=en&lr=&client=firefox-a&strip=1)....

extract....

Q: I've been using McAfee's antivirus software, which came installed on my computer. Recently I was given Norton's latest antivirus program, and I'm wondering whether it makes sense to install it as well. Are there any benefits to having two antivirus programs running at the same time?

A: Any benefits may be outweighed by potential conflicts between the programs. Symantec, the maker of Norton Antivirus, strongly recommends you run only one antivirus program at a time. The reason: "Having more than one antivirus program active in memory uses additional resources and can result in program conflicts and false virus alerts." Microsoft also discourages Windows XP users from running multiple antivirus programs.

You can avoid the problem by making sure only one antivirus program is active at any given time. But given the fact that McAfee and Norton are pretty comparable, it's probably not worth the trouble of separately running the two programs.

By the way, you probably don't even need an antivirus program. Most viruses arrive via e-mail, and all big Internet providers and Web mail services check for viruses before they send messages.
*********************************************************

i found the last paragraph interesting - you can all chuck your AV away you don't need it - it's all an illusion ;D

[StevieO]

See my posts about successfully running two AV's together in a certain way here. Posts 12 and 15

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=100274


StevieO

[toploader]

cheers StevieO

[RejZoR]

Well if dialup plays a major role than avast! is a clear winner with probably the best incrimental updating system. If your system has at least CPU around 2GHz, 512MB of RAM and a ATA100/ATA133 HDD drive with 8MB of cache (should work just fine on 4MB with 5400RPM) it should work the way you won't even notice it's there. If it doesn't, then it's something very very wrong with your PC.

I really wonder what kind of "new" machine you have. Coz thats not normal.
I installed avast! 4.6 on P3 733 (overclocked to 800MHz), 256MB SDR-RAM, 20GB HDD and it worked pretty well without any slowdowns or pauses. Works very smooth on my former AthlonXP 2400+ 512MB RAM and 200GB 8MB cache Maxtor HDD. With my AthlonXP 3200+ (just heavily overclocked old 2400+) it's completely unnoticeable and i can do a full scan while watching DivX movie and browsing the net at the same time without even knowing it's scanning my HDD.

[Benvan45]

It amazes me.......Avast is best again?? Just wonder why everybody isn't using it......!!!!!

Pfffffffff.........

>:( Putin

[RejZoR]

The why everyone is not using lets say NOD32 or Kaspersky which are clearly the best? Tough question isn't it? It's called "ability of your own selection/thinking"...

But this goes to just certain level. If avast! is slowing down a 1,5GHz+ machine with 512MB of ram, thats certanly not normal. Now it worked fine on some ancient P3 800MHz so i'd say it's not avast!'s fault but there is something wrong with that box...

[Phant0m]

Interesting, after frequent checks, I notice;

[dvk01]

The best free antivirus is the one that works for you on your computer

Some will like nad find AVG is the best, some Avast, some Antivir and some a different one

NO-ONE can state what is best as it is subjective and depends on many things including the system capabilities and what use the computer is put to

However IF you do high risk computer use or have important info on the computer then I would suggest that it's a false economy to skimp on av protection and you should consider the purchase of one of the ones that do have a better reputation in both tests and on various forums

[RejZoR]

Phant0m, that number doesn't mean much at all.
Memory Usage and VM Usage is what it counts (not that Task manager would be the most reliable way to measure anything...)

[Phant0m]

Hi RejZoR

Well ‘Peak Mem Usage’ is like second nature to me; you obviously fail to see what I’m getting at. Readings on my system it is totally reliable, while it may mean nothing to you, it means the world to me…

[Happy Bytes]

-{ Quote: "Phant0m, that number doesn't mean much at all.
Memory Usage and VM Usage is what it counts (not that Task manager would be the most reliable way to measure anything...)" }-

Only real programmers will understand this ;)

[Phant0m]

Happy Bytes

You like degrading people don’t you?

Well for your information, let me point out something,

‘Peak Memory Usage’ - The peak ‘amount of physical memory resident “”in”” a process since it started’.

I have never seen anything using Peak Memory Usage pass 50 K (and that is normally from Explorer.exe) on my system, and I keep my system up for numerous days, and only matter of 12hours, Avast! ashServ.exe drawn 339, 316 K…

[gigaman]

-{ Quote: "Well ‘Peak Mem Usage’ is like second nature to me; …" }-
Especially in that case, you should understand that the number doesn't really mean anything. A program can have as much "Peak Mem Usage" as your memory is - and not have any effect whatsoever on your computer.

[Happy Bytes]

-{ Quote: "Especially in that case, you should understand that the number doesn't really mean anything. A program can have as much "Peak Mem Usage" as your memory is - and not have any effect whatsoever on your computer." }-

Thats exactly right gigaman.

[Phant0m]

Did I say anything regarding it affecting the performance of my system? Some people here needs to wake up...

[vlk]

Avast tries to do as much unpacking in memory as possible. It will use up to one third of all RAM available on the system to do this.

This is most likely the reason the peak value is so high here.

[Notok]

-{ Quote: "The why everyone is not using lets say NOD32 or Kaspersky which are clearly the best? Tough question isn't it? It's called "ability of your own selection/thinking"...

But this goes to just certain level. If avast! is slowing down a 1,5GHz+ machine with 512MB of ram, thats certanly not normal. Now it worked fine on some ancient P3 800MHz so i'd say it's not avast!'s fault but there is something wrong with that box..." }-All software will play differently on different machines. Of the free AVs I've seen this report more often with Avast! than the others.. just as with KAV works great on some machines, and drags down others like a boulder. If all you want is a basic resident scanner, then by those standards Avast! may be bloated.. that's a subjective opinion, and I don't see anything particularly wrong with it.

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "

But this goes to just certain level. If avast! is slowing down a 1,5GHz+ machine with 512MB of ram, thats certanly not normal. Now it worked fine on some ancient P3 800MHz so i'd say it's not avast!'s fault but there is something wrong with that box..." }-

All antivirus programs will slow down a PC, that IS normal, they will all slow the rig down in some degree. It's a matter of "How much the PC will slow down" that's the variable across various PCs and various antivirus software.

And IMO, Avast is a little bit heavier than some other AV products in bogging down PCs, especially bootup time and waiting for the desktop to finish loading. I've heard the complaint from quite a few people about it too that I've installed in on, matter of fact this weekend I replaced CAI's EZTrust with avast because a friends 12 year old daughter has a way of getting malware on the laptop..and even the kid complained the next day that it was substantially slower in booting up and moving around. It was a somewhat new Dell P4 laptop with average memory specs, nothing too hot, but nothing too old and slow either.

I've been flipping to Avast over AVG more on my "freebie antivirus installs" lately because I feel it's better at protecting against browser junk and ad/spyware over AVG, so I just let the end users deal with it. They don't wanna pay for a quality lightweight antivirus, they'll have to deal with Avast. If they wanna pay, they'll get the green eye in the sky.

[Phant0m]

As long as it’ll only use up-to one third of my RAM available, I were curious, interested in the reasons for such high peak value of AshServ.exe process, now I suppose I have my answer..

Avast! Free awesome, awesome Free Anti-‘Virus’ system :)

[waters]

Antivir=advanced,it will protect better than other free ones

[vlk]

Phant0m, so am I right that you have 1GB of RAM in your system?

[Blackspear]

Ladies and Gentlemen, enough shots over the bow, keep personal comments to yourself and remain on topic please or this thread will be closed.

Blackspear.

[RejZoR]

Well talking about performance of AVs is perfectly ontopic. Afterall we're talkin which free AV would be the best...

[wildman]

Rejzor: I think you have a hang up with AVAST, while it may be a good program, I do believe that there are others out there also. Hay I may not be a technical expert, but I do know what does and does not work on my system, and there is not a damn thing wrong with it. I take away AVAST and it runs with no problems, I add AVAST and it slows down noticeably. Now what more do I need to know than that?

Thanks
Wildman
??? ::)

[WSFuser]

the fact that an AV can slow down one comp but not another just shows the differences in compatibility among programs and computers.

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "Rejzor: I think you have a hang up with AVAST, while it may be a good program, I do believe that there are others out there also. Hay I may not be a technical expert, but I do know what does and does not work on my system, and there is not a damn thing wrong with it. I take away AVAST and it runs with no problems, I add AVAST and it slows down noticeably. Now what more do I need to know than that?

Thanks
Wildman
??? ::)" }-
Your completely right, Wildman. Av's will have different behavior from pc to pc. Since Avast was not for you, may i then recommend another free choice called AntiVir, it is generally light on resources and with the latest beta it uses incremental updates making the update process very fast..............................;D ;D ;D ;)

[RejZoR]

Hey, use whatever you like. I don't care much tbh...

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "Rejzor: I think you have a hang up with AVAST, while it may be a good program, I do believe that there are others out there also. Hay I may not be a technical expert, but I do know what does and does not work on my system, and there is not a damn thing wrong with it. I take away AVAST and it runs with no problems, I add AVAST and it slows down noticeably. Now what more do I need to know than that?

Thanks
Wildman
??? ::)" }-

I had exactly the same with Avast....that's why I don't use it either.

;) Putin

[wildman]

-{ Quote: "Your completely right, Wildman. Av's will have different behavior from pc to pc. Since Avast was not for you, may i then recommend another free choice called AntiVir, it is generally light on resources and with the latest beta it uses incremental updates making the update process very fast..............................;D ;D ;D ;)" }-

:) Not incremental enough I fear. I think it is rather well known what I think about the company behind this product as well. Like the product, think the company behind it is the pits. They could get their act together, but they seem to arrogant to do so. Ask Mr. Mrrockford over at Castle Cops about the offer they have apparently not even acknowledged.

Thanks
Wildman

[532423]

There are 3 major FREE antivirus product on the market that have realtime scanner:

AntiVir
Avast!
AVG

All three of them doen not detect spywares! (you need to buy full version)

Any of them would perform good but you need antispyware with realtime scanner such as Microsoft Antispyware.

So my favorites are:

AntiVir
Microsoft Antispyware

background:
Ewido
BitDefender 8

================================================

Or just NOD32

[WSFuser]

wildman, then i guess ur sticking to AVG? good luck and hope it works out well.

[wildman]

-{ Quote: "wildman, then i guess ur sticking to AVG? good luck and hope it works out well." }-

:) For now it would look that way. Believe it or not, I still hope that AntiVir can get it's act together, as I liked that one as well.

Thanks
Wildman
;D 8)

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: ":) Not incremental enough I fear. Thanks
Wildman" }-
I know, i was only teasing a bit.;)

[toploader]

there arn't enough free AV's to fight over here - this is plea to kaspersky and NOD to renounce their capitalist ways and to make all their software free to all. in return they will be richly rewarded with praise and red beans and rice (unless of course their scanner misses something) ;) ;D

[Albinoni]

-{ Quote: "Why nobody spoke about BitDefender Free and Avast?" }-

Couldn't agree more. Personally I think the free version of BD 8 is better than AVG.

[toploader]

i'm not familiar with bitdefender 8 - is it a realtime scanner? (and if yes can you switch that component off at install) i only want it for on-demand. (same goes for antivir and avast can these be switched off at install so they don't run real time?)

i've decided i don't want to uninstall avg only to have to reinstall it if i don't like the alternatives. the main thing is to find an AV that can do a job with the minmum of hassle.

[toploader]

clamwin (http://www.clamwin.com) - anyone tried this? looks interesting - including a firefox extension for 1.5

(no realtime by looks of things - could make a useful backup)

[toploader]

PC Mag (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1864601,00.asp) tests the big three to find the head honcho.

[RejZoR]

avast! Cons:
Scheduled virus scans not available. Full report turned off by default. No option to scan only executable files.

Thats not true (Normal Sensitivity scans only infectable filetypes,but you can remove all other extensions i this case) and why the hell would anyone want to scan only EXE files? Haven't found anything directly obviosly wrong in AVG or AntiVir review. Maybe someone can check them out.

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "There are 3 major FREE antivirus product on the market that have realtime scanner:

AntiVir
Avast!
AVG
" }-

CAI's EZ Trust also has a real time scanner.

[WSFuser]

bitdefender is on-demand only fyi

[waters]

Etrust promo also

[solarpowered candle]

e trust promo is good and perhaps the best solution especially for older systems . The other solutions seem to slow down systems or have update issues etc. I have just repaired an old win98 for a freind and tried each of the free solutions in order to provide some av protection . The only solution that worked effortlessly both in real time and also with auto update , which never interfered with the pc was etrust promo.

[RejZoR]

Update problems? Thats new. Apart from sometimes slow AntiVir update servers i never encountered any problems updating any free AV.

[solarpowered candle]

well thats one out of three with anti virs slow updating especially on dial up. Avaste appears to work well on some setups however I have never had any luck with it not slowing me down like a bucket thrown over the stern ( thats both with win98 and a new xp). AVG from many accounts does seem to work ok but many experience a similar slow down. I think for any one who hasnt tried e trust promo its worth a shot as its the lightest av Iv tried and from reports others also. Its as fast as Nod on most systems . I dont use it currently on my xp as Im using Kav lite which is very light for me and ultra simplicity.
e trust promo http://etrust-chil.www.conxion.com/v7/

[wildman]

-{ Quote: "well thats one out of three with anti virs slow updating especially on dial up. Avaste appears to work well on some setups however I have never had any luck with it not slowing me down like a bucket thrown over the stern ( thats both with win98 and a new xp). AVG from many accounts does seem to work ok but many experience a similar slow down. I think for any one who hasnt tried e trust promo its worth a shot as its the lightest av Iv tried and from reports others also. Its as fast as Nod on most systems . I dont use it currently on my xp as Im using Kav lite which is very light for me and ultra simplicity.
e trust promo http://etrust-chil.www.conxion.com/v7/" }-

??? 15.7MB, that don't look small to me?

Thanks
Wildman

[RejZoR]

Wanna try a 30+ MB Norton?

[Arup]

Far from being bloated Avast is multi featured and even on ancient P-IIIs with 256MB, there is no slowdowns like other AVs of today.

[solarpowered candle]

yea I know that 15.7MB is a seemingly big download but its really surprising just how ultra lite e trust promo is on a system. Iv run e trust on win98 128 rams and its a breeze.
No disrespect intended for Avast as its certainly a good av . For those who may find for what ever reason it slows their system down then e trust promo is a neat option.

[ahinterl]

I think apart from questions like "how much of RAM does it consume" and "is it possible to define file exclusions", the most important feature a virus scanner should provide is as much of a detection rate as possible, both in realtime and on-demand scanning scenarios.

And here is where all free scanners have a problem. When looking at the latest reports from AV Comparatives, only the products from Kaspersky, Symantec, McAfee and Eset are worth to be considered for an install. All others may be nice, but I for my part prefer to be protected than having a nice skinned user interface.

Free versions at least for my taste have too many restrictions to be good protectors (applies to free firewalls etc. as well). Quality has it's price in our capitalistic world of today, that's the truth. If you want protection at some higher level, you need to pay for it. It's only fair because who would take care of virus definition files without being paid for?

In our times, freeware from business companies is always somehow crippled...

Andreas

Andreas

[RejZoR]

Well avast! is far from limitations of AVG and AntiVir regarding features.
I can easily say it has more features than many payable AVs out there.

And you worry about developers getting payed if they offer free AVs?
All 3 free AVs have their bigger brothers for commercial usage with more features (avast! too). Not to mention solutions for corporate usage like file/mail servers protection,workstations protection etc.
Thats always the main profit part. Home users are usually just a small fragment of that (usually).

[TAP]

I think it's all about what you expect from the product, for me avast! home is better than many pay antivirus software.

Efficiency update mechanism

With avast! home, I get fast and accurate incremental updates (approx. 2-80 KB) as soon as it's released, I can set avast! home to check for update hourly.

Outstanding robust features

- Web Shield/URL Blocking, offers real-time HTTP scanning to eliminate web-based threats
- Network Shield, offers real-time network traffic scanning to eliminate network worms
- Boot-time scan, offers bootable CD virus scanner style

Reliability

Its engine (avast! pro) has been certified by ICSA Labs and passed the latest Virus Bulletin test for ITW malware, and gets approx. 90% against zoo malware. (So please tell me, Why Microsoft uses eTrust even though eTrust has low detection rates of zoo malware.)


Efficiency update mechanism and overall reliable performance are important for me, not the total number of malware detected, so avast! home is enough for me. :)

[RejZoR]

Well eTrust isn't exactly the best regarding detection either. I think it hasn't even reached required level for AV-Comparatives to even enter the testing. Thats why it was tested separately...

[WSFuser]

-{ Quote: "(So please tell me, Why Microsoft uses eTrust even though eTrust has low detection rates of zoo malware.)" }-
i thought they had licenses for nod32, so did they switch AVs?

[Blackcat]

-{ Quote: "i thought they had licenses for nod32, so did they switch AVs?" }-
Microsoft use different AV's not just one product.

And detection rates are not always the first consideration.

[TAP]

-{ Quote: "i thought they had licenses for nod32, so did they switch AVs?" }-

Microsoft has a license of several antivirus software such as eTrust, Norman and others to use in its release labs and as far as I know Microsoft uses eTrust solution to protect its network.

http://www.norman.com/News/Press_releases/2004/19582/en
http://www3.ca.com/customersuccesses/Details.aspx?CID=60939

[Zimzi]

Avast works excellent on my Celeron 800 Mhz, 256 Mb, Windows Me PC and when I turn off the rotation of Avast system tray icon it seems to me that Avast works even more stable and faster. For me Avast is number one options regarding free AV's becouse AntiVir makes many problems on my old PC and AVG altough very light and stable has very poor detection.

The only possible problem with Avast can be detection rate. Avast results are very good but quite lower than Kaspersky, BitDefender and Nod32? Also, I do not know does Avast has heuristic at all?

[WSFuser]

atm, avast only uses heuristics for its email providers.

[wildman]

::) I have come to the conclusion that we could argue this category till the cows came home by themselves. The best simply is what works best for the individual, it is as simple as that. Took me a long time to figure this out by the way. Also I don't think it wise to place all ones eggs in one basket so to speak, so the point of detection as far as I am concerned becomes rather mute, unless the product is really atrocious, and if that is the case it wouldn't be around for to long I would think.

Thanks
Wildman

[RejZoR]

Well other way around free antiviruses is to join beta tests, actively help developers and they might reward you with full license. Thats very common way to get full featured payable antivirus. You have to work a bit but it's probably easier than paying for it. If they don't give the license, you had the chance to freely use their new tool. Of course you already understand the risks and responsibilities of using beta software right? ;)
And this way you also create program to your taste if you have cool and useful ideas ;D

But go to beta testing only if you're serious about it and bug reporting, not just because you MIGHT get a free license!

[wildman]

-{ Quote: "yea I know that 15.7MB is a seemingly big download but its really surprising just how ultra lite e trust promo is on a system. Iv run e trust on win98 128 rams and its a breeze.
No disrespect intended for Avast as its certainly a good av . For those who may find for what ever reason it slows their system down then e trust promo is a neat option." }-

:o O.k., seeing as how this one I really did not give a fair shot to (was scared of the 15.7MB thing), I have now downloaded it and installed it on my machine. I shall now see how this one acts. I have nothing against AVG by the way, and still may revert back to it, but thought I would try E-Trust for awhile.

Thanks
Wildman

[solarpowered candle]

-{ Quote: ":o O.k., seeing as how this one I really did not give a fair shot to (was scared of the 15.7MB thing), I have now downloaded it and installed it on my machine. I shall now see how this one acts. I have nothing against AVG by the way, and still may revert back to it, but thought I would try E-Trust for awhile.
" }-

good luck with it. Its pretty easy on both the eyes and the system

[wildman]

:o Nope, this one is using quiet a bit of VM memory, or at least my computer is frequently adjusting this through windows. It's out of here. I most likely will be going back to AVG, or don't have a heart attack, I may even again try AntiVir. People had the wrong impression that I disliked the program, that was never the case, it was always the fact that it was hard to impossible to contact the server to maintain it, and H+BEDV appeared to not take much if any action to correct the situation. I have now noticed that the program is available on some of the better software WEB sites, and if H+BEDV would see clear to provide the VDF updates on more than just it's own site, this would no longer be a problem in my opinion. One can only hope!

Thanks
Wildman
;D

[RipVanTinkle]

'anyone tried this? looks interesting - including a firefox extension for 1.5

(no realtime by looks of things - could make a useful backup)'

WinPooch v0.5.6.1 can give you RealTime using Clam
http://sourceforge.net/projects/winpooch/

======

am trying Anti-Vir at present
too early to give a view

[Comp01]

I've been using AVG Free for the past 4 years, no problem what-so-ever, I've never had a virus, as long as you use some kind of IDS and a firewall, you're pretty much set, and I download alot of stuff as well, from alo of different sites, I scan every file before I use it with AVG, Avast, AntiVir, Ewido, and then upload it to jotti if it is <15MB, no viruses yet.

[wildman]

:) My son-in-law has AVG "free" installed on the system that my grandkids use, and started back in the days of version 6.0. They are 14, 12 and 8 years of age. You got any idea as to what these kids have been up to on the WEB? Thus far there have been no problems. Although I think he should have more security programs, the only other one that he has on that system is Zone Alarm (fire wall) "free". I also think he for the most part forgets about these two programs and lets them do their own thing. He is on that COX super duper connection by the way. Kids say it even makes DSL look like a snail.

I now once again have AVG "free" on my machine, and thus far it is acting very well. I like the ease of use and the ease of obtaining the VDF updates with this one better than any of the other "free" ones I have tried thus far. I will admit that this is a matter of personal preference, and may not be the cup of tea for everyone.

Thanks
Wildman