Kaspersky Internet Security good?

Hello wilders forum.
Ive decided to install kaspersky internet security 2013 to use up my license which was a very good price.£19 here in the UK.
I was using comodo but ive imaged that installation and may go back to it at some point in the future.
I would very much like some opinions on KIS here.Overall im extremely impressed by this software and find it is not heavy on my PC at all and is very smooth.
Any comments or opinions please.?
Thank You.

 

One of the best suites out there offering solid protection, if it likes your system you can't go wrong with it.
Very simple to manage but with several layers of customisation if you want to play with it (not really needed).

 

I have it on one my office old comp (Celeron D 2.4 MHz, 500 MB RAM, XP). It is impossible to work on the comp when Kaspersky is being updated. That's why I switched off automatic update. No other issues. Most comps (>1000) at my job are with Kaspersky. I've never heard that some comp got infected.

One my amigo have been buying KIS for years though he is well aware of freebies. He had no issues with it at all.

 

Thanks for the replies.
Its running really well here with no slowdowns etc and the interface is very nice and lots of settings etc.
I bought the license because it was really cheap and i dont usually pay for security software but this one seems to be very good value for money.

 

You can obtain the same protection for free with Zone Alarm's AV/Firewall security suite - now updated for 2013! It has the Kaspersky AV engine.

 

No.not quite the same protection.Ive never tried zonealarm and from what i hear it it extremely heavy on the system using 200mb or more.

 

Its quite light on my system. Vsmon.exe loads fast and ZA tray exe runs without issues. Manual updates to AV are fast. Vsmon.exe consumes 450 MB - not a drag! The heavy resource load come from Waterfox which can gobble up to 1 GB of RAM.

 

As others said, it is always near or at the top in the independent tests. One thing I like is that it runs lighter now than ever IMHO. Good luck.

 

Doesn't it contain the SDK engine? I suspect the Application Control feature in KIS is much stronger than ZA free version. I'm not saying ZA free is bad as it's probably one of the better free suites available (despite coming from company such as Checkpoint). As stated above though, the KIS updater can be a pain sometimes.

 

2-3 days ago I removed KIS 2012 or 2011 from a PC [the license was expiring] and the uninstall from add/remove Windows panel didn't work, it just blocked the PC. I had to safe boot to remove it. I also noticed that it was using the HD quite a lot.

 

Offtopic ON: Correct, ZA uses the Kaspersky antivirus engine, equivalent to current Kaspersky enterprise products. All the rest is completely different in the two products. Such as HIPS, phishing protection, Site check, data protection, etc. The free version comes with a limited application control as compared to retail versions. So, it does not make very much sense to compare the two. Not sure I follow the comment on Checkpoint. They are the ones that invented the SPI firewall. Took ZA to version 11 and they are offering a free security suite with KAV on the market. Not bad at all I would say. offtopic OFF

 

Give it a try, if you like it and you can purchase it then go ahead.
KIS is one of the most complete and best AIO suites out there IMO.

 

Kaspersky is the best AV consistently for both the last 5 and the last 10 years.

Others come and go, Kaspersky stays one of the best.

And I don't use it.

 

agree

 

I switched to KIS about 2 years ago and so far very happy with it. Running it on 3 separate computers
and no issues yet.

I did go into the settings and crank everything up to "high" security level from the default settings.

 

Some are not a fan of their marketing tactics:
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=282307

Also, in the past there was controversy about a vulnerability which allowed for complete control of the target computer. It was debated whether this was intentional or not.(Possible Mossad backdoor, since it's an Isreali company.)

 

haha, i come here thinking this, its true
kaspersky is always discovery new and awesome malware all the time (flame, red october, etc).

 

That one was one single issue two years ago and never repeated. Very unfair to pick it up and discredit years of good development, many other AVs do have very aggressive tactics (continuous pop-ups at every boot) on their free products that actually ZA does not have at all. The Mossad part is just a big joke (no proof whatsoever been provided). Surprising that there are users still tricked by this nonsense or still mentioning the ZA call home paranoia of ten years ago. Just like rumours about Kaspersky linked to Russian government spying or Norton backdoor to NSA, etc. What I have seen so far is just negative feedback based on general hate to the product. Very legitimate, we can hate products, its fine... but with little facts to support it. What is more worrying is that you have readers believing whatever is published on the net

This is my last comment on the subject as it has little to do with OP questions. And I personally hate threads derailing into the offtopic. Sorry in advance to the OP for this.

 

It was only "one single" issue because only "one single" issue was listed. There probably could have been a dozen issues listed regarding Checkpoint marketing. I notice that in that thread some posters defend Checkpoint, even for a rogue type ad. Checkpoint will always have their fan boys, I suppose, like most security products. Of course, nobody needs to take my word for Checkpoint's past, just do a search of this site or on the web in general and make up your own mind.

 

I hate to come back to this again... but yes that was a single issue. Mind to come with others example like that, pops ups about malware? You simply can't as there was no other one. You can goggle any product and find horror stories about them but are they real? Most they are not or just single cases... You must use some brain to distinguish between the real and the nonsense/troll/venting/competition discrediting/etc. Unfortunately as you can see here many don't use any filter when reading on the web. This is valid for ZA as well as KAV, Norton, etc... Can we go back to the subject of the thread?

 

Well thanks for the input on kaspersky everyone..upon research it would appear kaspersky does very well in av tests etc.and i have not experienced any slowdowns what so ever..they do have a different approach to the firewall.

 

If you mean no stealth status then yes, they do it by design. But I think you can find guides on how to make it stealth as well as never ending discussions about why to disregard the issue.

 

Yep and upon research of the stealth issue i realise its a non issue...in 2 clicks i can stealth the firewall but it comes as it is for a reason so ive left it as it is..

 

Yeap

 

Checkpoint has a history of suspect advertising policies which appears to be the point made by the post in question. Some other companies acting similarly was not the issue. I notice that in the thread pointed out in the post that your contribution appears to be that of unbridled allegiance to Checkpoint. As I stated earlier in this thread, everyone should make up their own minds by doing their own research. I don't ask anyone to believe me.