F-Secure vs NOD32

Paul, you run NOD32 right? Just curious.. If you want to see a vulnerability with the a certain popular trojan packer and your AV, you should have ran that file I provided linked to you in PM a few days back.

Not only does it waltz right past, but it will effectively kill your system. As addressed in this thread:

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=33351

I'm half tempted to reinstall certain AVs and see if they are dealing with the bad guy yet and the bad guys packed within this badguy. I know Ewido, BOClean, and TDS3 added fixes for it. AVK, KAV, McAfee, F-Secure and Norman all picked it up totally - without definitions for the rebased inside and the packer on the outside - the *ONLY* AV's we've tested that could pick it up.

F-Secure = YUMMY.. If it was cheaper, i'd of got it, eXpendiaAVK at $29 is far too tempting to ignore..

 

Oops...this means F-Secure users have been vulnerable to sober variants for a very long time? I'll pass, thanks....

Blue

 

Interesting, but two things can be surmised by this I suspect...

One being F-Secure is very up front about bugs and issues that come up, and fixing them rapidly.

Another, is that they aren't afraid to issue real bulletins, outlining problems, so everyone can know and see.

Now that begs to question, how many products in the AV business do you know that are willing to do that? I'd bet hard cash other AV products have come up with security issues, you didn't hear anything, and they simply launched a patch live to fix it - firing it off to their clients on a definition download sweep. You think?

I don't use F-Secure myself, but I give them credit for their openness, honesty, support, and rapid responses to issues such as these. Thats more than I can say for some companies i've delt with, that probably don't even report these things, much less admit to them after they fix them. Its definately a product i'd consider though. PS: I'd love to run NOD32, but until they add more packer support, and double their malware/trojan database, add AH to Amon, and HTTP scanning, its just not viable for me unfortunately. ( I will require all of the above). Maybe future versions once the product matures more...

 

It seems that everything is the same. Interesting ...

http://www.f-secure.com/products/anti-virus/clientsecurity/screenshots/internetshield.jpg
http://www.f-secure.com/estore/images/fs2003/is/pexis_home_eng.jpg
http://www.f-secure.com/estore/images/fs2003/av/pexav_home_eng.jpg

 

Please kloshar,
Can you tell me about system resources needed by F-Secure IS 2003/2004?
I´m very interesting in this Suite.
Thanks in advance!

backfolder.-

 

I'm very sory, I can't. I don't have it. I can only tell you about 5.42 for Workstation and 5.53 Client Security.

 

Ii've tried it on a laptop with a 1.8GHZ P4M, 5400RPM HD 768MB RAM and a 3.2GHZ P4, 1GB RAM, Raptors in RAID 0... F-Secure had a noticeable impact on both systems.

I also don't like the fact that it uses backweb. Had issues with other apps that use it.

 

If they changed away from backweb in F-Secure, it would be *THE* AV/AT application to own, thats for sure!

Heck, i've had AV testing houses tell me they are afraid to test F-Secure, because its so good and strong, it wouldn't be fair to the single engine products out there.. /shakes head

 

Please name these "AV testing houses" that actually say that.

 

You don't believe that? I do!

 

Its not that good. Belive me.

 

If you say that, you say that kav is not good and f-prot even. Why not?

 

I have F-Secure Client Security . I know it is resource-heavy (although I don't feel it), but the reason we all use AntiVirus software is to stay protected. Therefore, detection rate is one of the most important factors when I choose my AntiVirus software. I mean, who cares about scan speed when the software misses a few threats, right?