Is it a bad idea to have too many security filters?

I use KAV, which install the NDIS filter to monitor any malicious URLS, MVPS hosts file, Ad-Block Plus

Is that overkill and would slow my browsing down? Can I do without MVPS hosts file for example?

I read on one forum online that Kaspersky doesn't play nice with modified hosts files but I'm not too sue about that

what do y'all pros think?

 

I'm no pro but here are my two cents. I think KAV+ABP+Norton DNS+Google strict search(if you use google of course) would be more than good enough.

 

Since you are using that combo is it slowing you down? Did you try with it on and off, any noticeable change? A simple experimentation and you know what works for you.

 

Hello berryracer,

A modified HOSTS file to prevent visiting malicious webpages is passive protection, and will not slow down browsing. I would advice to keep MVPS host file.

It's possible that a security software will warn that the HOSTS file is modified.
A security software can't decide if the modification is malicious or benign. Malware can also modify the HOSTS file to redirect you.

You can keep your protection, it will not slow down your surfing.

Regards,
Niels

 

Thanks a lot for the explanation guys

I guess Ill just keep my hosts file then

 

You can but I wouldn't. Between KAV, AdblockPlus and whatever blacklist your browser already has I doubt that you gain anything with the HOSTS file. If you want the extra job of keeping that file updated and it makes you feel better then use it, but ultimately it will slow you down and probably accomplish nothing beyond what you already have in place. If you are the paranoid type Sandboxie is probably a better use of the resources than the HOSTS file.

 

IMO, it's not overkill until you start duplicating coverage, specifically more than one app filtering by domain or sub-domain name, IP address(es) etc. If one filters by (sub)domain name and the other by IP address or IP range, there shouldn't be any conflict. Depending on how much you're blocking, slowdowns are possible with either method.

I don't see either as being particularly valuable against malware or malicious sites. They change and move too fast to keep up with. If you define security in this instance as protection from tracking, calling home, blocking adservers, etc, for these purposes they're all useful.

 

After the last 2 comments. I decided to remove MVPS Hosts and just stick MBAM + Windows Firewall + Ad-BlockPlus + SAS on demand

 

MBAM Pro alone will do most of the malicious site blocking. To that I would perhaps consider Norton DNS as a backup. Adblock Plus isn't really meant for blocking "bad sites". There's a reason it's called "Adblock" You can use the Malware Domains list for ABP, but I don't know, that list seems to give me a hit in performance and I already have MBAM Pro and a safer DNS provider to do that kind of work. HOST files I'm just not that big on. I wouldn't ever call them "useless", but considering the length of time between updates to modified ones I'm not sure they're the best option. I know plenty of people that use them though, it's just my personal opinion.

Edit: Another personal opinion is get rid of SAS. Its day in the sun is long over and it seems to have terrible detection performance. MBAM will run circles around it.