360 Internet Security: FREE Triple antivirus engine, BitDefender included

Well, that's why they aren't comparable, be it malware definitions or webpage blocking count. There is no global standard for taht and no one klnows how one company counts them, thus they aren't comparable between companies.

 

In my country we say "comparing apples with pears" probably because oranges don't do well in our latitudes

Back to the topic, nowadays when the cloud technology is spreading widely, the number of signatures really doesn't count. Moreover as already explained, the security solution, a different way of counting signatures.

 

Is firewall included in 360? From the information obtained on their web it seems to me that firewall is missing but I'm not completely sure. If so, it's a substantial shortage, at least for me. It would force to use a third party firewall what I don't want. It's pity as I am quite tempted to give this solution a try.

 

I really hope Qihoo 360 never have a Firewall...

 

Why? If you say this, you should give the reasons.

 

Because we really don't need that...

Qihoo 360 IS already have a very good proactive detection, and Windows have an excellent and hyper fast firewall that just works, so they should concentrate their effort to improve against malware only...

But this is just my opinion...

 

As far as the inbound protection is concerned I fully agree but if you want to have the equally strong outbound protection you will have to tweak Win Firewall (create rules). In this respect Webroot is probably the most smart, it uses Win firewall for the inbound and its own firewall for the outbound communication.

That's perfect and I do thanks for your opinion

 

Yes, but since Qihoo 360 IS already has proactive/behavioral protection...

But OK, for those that want to control everything on their systems, maybe some outbound protection to complement Windows Firewall would be nice...

 

OK let's conclude that adding some outbound protection would make 360 IS a killer of all other AV solutions.

 

If it was optional, OK!

 

Can someone explain the huge difference in the installer's size of v4.9 and beta v5? While the installer of v4.9 is ca 240 MB beta v5 is 31 MB

 

Maybe v5 doesn't have all the signatures built-in?

Where is the beta link?

 

Inside this article.

 

-http://int.down.360safe.com/360is/360is_min_5.0.0.5000beta.exe-

 

What are the differences between the stable and beta?

Still no Avira engine...

 

Hmmm, 210 MB on account of definitions, maybe ... or simply better packed installer or ...

 

I`d imagine if it scans a file with only write permissions (GW) and finds it to be malicious then it will alert you, otherwise it will only scan files that have execute permissions (GE).
So it will catch a file on medium setting as soon as it`s written to disc and cannot be accidently executed. Also may be helpful in files being written from over a network to prevent shares becoming malicious...

 

Of course not, that's for Total Security, which we are still waiting for, but will hopefully be released soon.

 

Then I will wait for news...

 

Well testing it says otherwise. It seems emsisoft detects more and gives tons more warning the 360IS from what I have seen by testing it.

So even-though the numbers mean not much, in detection it is superior then 360IS, eventhough they both use BD engine. Could be emsisoft own engine that detects more.

 

Concerning the beta there is a Qihu add-on in IE's toolbars and extensions ( SafeMon Class ) just wondering what this feature performs

It was disabled but I've enabled it for the time being and see no difference.

 

Does anyone has the answer to the questions above

 

To my knowledge it's just as secure but I can't proof it.

 

The difference lies in how much faster/earlier an AV can detect an anomaly or suspicious activity within a malware delivery sequence. On-write is earlier than on-execute only. Whether one consider that as necessary is open to debate.