AVG Pro or F-Prot

So simply what are you trying to say Wings? Idon't understand what are you trying to say....

 

From what I gather from 2 threads, he is saying people are stupid and moronic. - hehe, sorry wings, just letting you know what people may observe - best not to call people names - Maybe just "the uninformed" or "ill-informed" sounds better than "stupid" or "morons" - no offense, just MO.

- but he doesn't say what horror stories such as the desire to remove tags when uninstalling - KAV will just leave them in place.

 

@Wings
My earlier comment that you quote was meant to be lighthearted and to simply relate that, for me, it is important to put things into perspective. I was in no way implying that your efforts to reach the best resolution for you was unproductive or faulty. But, you see, the original post indicated that KAV was not a good solution for my situation. I understand completely that F-Prot may not be as effective as KAV; in fact, I tried KAV before the others. Compromise is required for my setup; that is a simple fact. A different solution may be appropriate for your setup and needs. It is not suprising that you reached a conclusion that many thousands have before, i.e., KAV is better than some other AVs, for some people.

From my experience and reading so far, F-prot appears to be a improvement over AVG Pro; and KAV remains an option that is unacceptable to me.

 

To everyone from Firefighter!

If someone is trying to say that F-Prot is a crap, according to my tests against my 2040 infected archived samples, all other than eScan 4.4.6 (= KAV engine) are then crap too. But seriously, F-Prot is REALLY GOOD av despite of it's poor unpacking skills.

FF av-test 8-2004 against 2040 infected archived samples:

Trojan like malware [568];
390 Backdoor & Trojan, 61 Exploit, 28 TrojanDownloader, 71 TrojanDropper and 18 TrojanSpy


553 eScan Free 4.4.6

488 F-Prot 3.15

488 MKS_VIR 2004 with AH

484 CSAV 4.91

467 BitDefender 7.2 Free

440 DrWeb 4.31b

429 Avast 4.1 Home

420 NOD 2.000.11 beta upd. 1.838 with AH

377 AntiVir 6.27.0.4

310 ClamWin 0.35

285 AVG Free 6.0.740_494



Script like malware [526];
90 BAT, 12 HTML, 36 JS script, 236 Macro, 11 PHP, 10 Script and 131 VBS


497 eScan Free 4.4.6

489 DrWeb 4.31b

486 F-Prot 3.15

482 BitDefender 7.2 Free

479 CSAV 4.91

452 AntiVir 6.27.0.4

445 MKS_VIR 2004 with AH

430 NOD 2.000.11 beta upd. 1.838 with AH

420 Avast 4.1 Home

368 ClamWin 0.35

333 AVG Free 6.0.740_494



Viruses [812];
42 Other virii, 313 Win32 and 457 Worm


786 eScan Free 4.4.6

759 BitDefender 7.2 Free

753 F-Prot 3.15

741 DrWeb 4.31b

740 MKS_VIR 2004 with AH

732 CSAV 4.91

714 Avast 4.1 Home

713 AntiVir 6.27.0.4

688 ClamWin 0.35

684 NOD 2.000.11 beta upd. 1.838 with AH

632 AVG Free 6.0.740_494



and finally Riskware [134];
28 Constructor, 7 Joke, 6 Keylogger, 50 PolymorphicEngine and 43 VirTool


93 eScan Free 4.4.6

70 BitDefender 7.2 Free

70 F-Prot 3.15

69 MKS_VIR 2004 with AH

67 CSAV 4.91

48 NOD 2.000.11 beta upd. 1.838 with AH

46 AntiVir 6.27.0.4

43 DrWeb 4.31b

39 Avast 4.1 Home

35 ClamWin 0.35

10 AVG Free 6.0.740_494



Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

From this example I entirely agree!

Not very careful in your case!

Therefore, for those people, like yourself, not carrying out safe-hex, no AV including F-Prot will give you full protection. Otherwise, for careful surfers, IMO, it is a very good choice.

 

F-PROT is one of the finest AV's ever made, IMO.

A top-notch choice, in my book, because it does the job, and stays the heck out of the way.

No, it won't find every piddling "trojan" out there--or rank #1 against crapware--but NO AV will all the time. As a choice for home or office, though--it's great.

Get's my thumbs-up between the choices mentioned.

 

Most of us know that KAV is an excellent AV, but it would be more relevant to return to the original thread which was on the relative merits of AVG Pro and F-Prot.

Further, it’s a pity that some people try out an AV for a few hours/days then decide to ‘bash’ the product over in a forum. Some of us have used licensed versions of F-Prot for a number of years because we have been very happy with our choice for a variety of reasons.

Product bashing without much substance (“I think F-Prot sucks”) has little effect on seasoned users!

 

While I would stress again that I am not bashing F-Prot, it does have a serious problem with unpacking. Here is what F-Prot Technical Support itself told me in response to my expression of concern about this:

"Until we are able to unpack executables properly in the scanning process we are forced to detect most of the security risks / Trojans / Backdoors by manually adding each variant."

They went on to add:

"There are quite a few of these malicious objects out there that we currently don’t detect. We are adding detection for them each day, and by the dozens, so it is only a matter of time before we will catch up with the files that you have been using to compare our scanner with other antivirus software."

Like I said, I don't know how well F-Prot compares to AVG because I have never used AVG. But it is disconcerting to say the least to pay for a product like F-Prot only to discover that much cheaper products (like the single engine Extendia Antivirus AVK) and even free products (like Ewido Security Suite) have a better track record of flagging "the security risks / Trojans / Backdoors" than F-Prot.

I have not given up on F-Prot, but whether I will renew my subscription when it expires come October remains to be seen.

 

I keep a 10-user F-Prot Windows subscription going and distribute it to family and friends. No failures yet.

Nick

 

I have been trialing F-Prot for one week now, and I really like it. It's really low on system resources. I also like the fact that I can pay one time, and install it on 5 machines.

I trialed NOD32, KAV Personal 5.0, bought Extendia single scanner version for $9.99, and installed Mcaffee 8.0 because I got it for free. Mcafee 8.0 caused long shut down times, and there was 5 running processes. KAV 5.0 and Extendia AVK single scanner slowed my XP machine that is using a AMD Barton 3200+. It took longer for everything to open.

Using F-Prot now, and my machine is snappy. F-Prot loads on boot very fast, and there are no hangs on shut down either. I have two AV running processes. It's simple to setup and use. It's easy to shut down the F-StopW.exe real time scanner. I think I have found the perfect candidate to use with BoClean for a layered approach.

I don't do P2P. I don't download hacks or cracks, and I don't open email attachments. Just play my games, and surf the net.

Sorry I could not do a compare to AVG Pro. Just wanted to state what I think of F-Prot.

 

Been using F-Prot + BOClean for 3+ years. And now Process Guard. Very pleased with the combination.

Nick

 

Sorry to be slightly Off Topic.

First, when i first search there isn't many user of F Prot in this forum, now it turns out that a lot of F Prot user are happy but they are reader of Wilder rather than a Register member, May i ask why don't you register?

It has been mention many time in this thread. About Safe Hex ( What does it Actually Short for ? ).

If i use Firefox / Or IE with Active X disable , With Software Firwall and also behind a Router, Never Uses p2p and Bt to download Misc crack or Hacks, Don't open Email Attchment. Disable HTML in Email Client.

I wanted to know what are ther chances for me getting a Virus / malware.

P.S have been testing F Prot for nearly a week now and extremely happy. I have never been as statisify with a AV.

 

F-Prot has a very poor unpacking engine, as do other AV’s, and this has been commented on here at Wilders many times before. This is due for improvement in the new version, which may be out before your renewal date.

Because of this weakness, an additional Antitrojan program is recommended alongside F-Prot in high-risk sites. Otherwise, at safer sites, where the chances of picking up a trojan are minimal, I am comfortable in using F-Prot by itself.

If you are not happy with your present AV and you visit high-risk sites then by all means change your Antivirus program or at least supplement your defences with an AT. F-Prot, unfortunately is not perfect!

 

dear wings, that was a huge post and somewhere in between i got lost. yes by that example i was trying to make people feel that F-Prot isn't that bad. no percentage is important when the testbed is made by a professional not by someone like Kobra. no offence meant to your test of course. KAV is the leader as far as detection goes and its not wise to compare F-Prot with it. F-Prot is small and efficient with powerful heuristics thats all.

 

To everyone from Firefighter!

If you count manually the total detecting rate of F-Prot in my test, you will see that F-Prot was the second best against Trojan like nasties and also in total protection only beated by KAV engined av:s. If that's a shame, I can't say anything else.

By the way, F-Prot was the second best against 390 backdoors and trojans (356), only MKS_VIR 2004 was very close that (354).

Even I have some 111 infected archives that KAV was unable to detect as infected. AntiVir 6.27 detected 21 of those, BDF 7.2 Free and MKS_VIR 2004 detected 20 of those undetectable by KAV. Any av isn't totally perfect.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Well, let's go back to the topic;

"AVG Pro or F-Prot?"

Surprising to find out today that AVG scores better than F-Prot.

11,000+ nasties

1. KAV - 10,441
2. Dr.Web - 10,165
3. AVG Pro - 10,023
4. F-Prot - 9,996

Let me make it clear again, this is not a test with a few hundred viruses, this a mix of 11,000+ (!) nasty little buggers like viruses, backdoors, worms, trojans, script vir, macro vir, etc.

I get the impression that some of you don't now what a number like 11,000 means!

I really don't care what other people think about all this, I'll make up my own mind after all the results.

Topic closed and no need for me to visit this forum anymore; I made up my mind. I never understood why some have hundreds of posts. To those I have to say with a smile; "One day you really have to decide dudes!"

Bye, bye, see you back in a few months I guess.

For those running this forum; keep up the good work;
this forum has been really useful to me and I will recommend it to others!

 

Confucius say "Kobras do have wings".

 

To everyone from Firefighter!

Just added Command av 4.91 to my test table after scanned each main category folders separately!

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

lol Blackcat, sounds like it is true. he tested it and he decided it all by himself. people like these don't need any forums. i wonder why he was here. to post insulting remarks like people here don't know what 11k is?

dear Firefighter, Command vs. F-Prot sounds really yummy. keep it coming.

 

Hey Firefighter, you said that F-Prot was very good at detecting trojan-like malware in your test? Maybe you should look at tests on various websites, e.g. AV-Comparatives and Rokop - F-Prot actually falls behind NOD in trojan detection.

"Wings", what percentage of the malware was composed of trojans? F-Prot isn't that great at detecting trojans, you know. Also, people other than you have done tests - you might want to check out their results.

I always thought Confucius was on to something. Now I know what it was.

Indeed it does...

 

FF,

Can you clear some of your pm's; you have reached your maximum!!!!

 

To Pigman from Firefighter!

I had totally 390 trojans & backdoors in my test. Below are those detected ones.

377 eScan Free 4.4.6

356 F-Prot 3.15

354 CSAV 4.91 & MKS_VIR 2004

346 BitDefender 7.2 Free & Ewido

313 DrWeb 4.31b

309 Avast 4.1 Home

308 NOD 2.000.11 beta

294 AntiVir 6.27.0.4

225 ClamWin 0.35

209 AVG Free 6.0.740_494


In the Rokop test, see below,

http://www.rokop-security.de/main/article.php?sid=693

I counted by myself from those figures they have given that there were some 40 common trojans and some 100 Zoo backdoors. Only in those 40 common trojans F-Prot was beaten by NOD.

In AV_Comparatives test F-Prot was clearly better than NOD.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/

Also in the latest VirusP 10-2003, F-Prot was clearly better than NOD. Maybe that's not so uncommon, that F-Prot was better than NOD in my test too!

F-Prot is only poor in those tests were they are using runtimepacked trojans, like Nautilus does, see below.

http://boardadmin.funpic.de/viewforum.php?f=4

When NOD was so close DrWeb 4.31b, was that very poor then?

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

To everyone from Firefighter!

I have scanned my collection with AVG 7.0.262 Trial too (1380 total detections). So far it seems to be so that ClamWin 0.35 beated AVG 7.0.262 Trial with over 20 detections and AntiVir 6.27.0.4 with over 200 detections against those all categories. Can someone show me how I can save my scanning logs to notepad when using AVG 7.0 Trial? Thanks!

PS. Just added AntiVir 6.27.0.4 to my scanning logs. Enjoy!

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Clamwin beat AntiVir by 200 detections?!

Wow. Even with the heuristics and everything, AntiVir still sucks.