Lightest Anti-virus for browsing

Could not disagree more. Obfuscation techniques are not efficacious overall. Fear of infection is largely based on lack of knowledge. Many AVs will dig "deep enough" to remove all traces, and the better ones will make the issue academic because you will never get infected to begin with. I have never had an infection on 76 computers running night and day-all high risk. Paranoia is sold by the pound here. That is why there is such an emotional and negative (usually) reaction when someone says they are not running any AV. It is like saying the emperor has no clothes.

 

Obfuscation makes it a lot harder to analyze files.
Here's a basic sample of "obfuscation":

Unobfuscated

Code:

10 + 52 = 62

Obfuscated

Code:

5 + 21 - 3 + 14 % 50 + 16 - 11 + 8 / 2 + 19 = 62

But, of course, it won't stop them from adding signatures to detect it.

 

I have used AVG,Avast,AntiVir,Mcaffe and now I am using NOD32. All of which do not slow down web browsing. I tried KAV twice and it slowed my pc down and web browsing. Some sites would not even load.

 

Two questions:

1. What AV (if any) are you running?
2. How many infections have you had?

 

1. None.
2. None.

 

I thought so.

 

Although, I am a regular AV tester. I used to always use an AV... but I'm not a dangerous surfer.

Just saying, any code can be made a different way, so detecting specific plain-text code won't get far. (Behaviour and sandboxing techniques which AVs use can catch it though.)

 

What AV(s) in your testing are the best for sandboxing and behavior? I have been testing from the beginning of time, so interested in your analysis/results.

 

I pay attention to speed and general detection, but I don't much care about the heuristics, as long as they're not piss poor.

 

But what AV?

 

Or any AV with web scanning turning off if it has this option.

 

Lightest Anti-virus for browsing?

eerrrh, what is browsing?

 

What is an idiot?

 

I was getting worried about 'obfuscation', have you heard what happens if THE MASSES is printed wrong with letter m placed before THE?

 

My best experience has been with Avira.

 

IMHO some the AV vendors have been in the biz for a very long time and by now should highly consider ‘lightening’ the products ‘use of resources, impacting browsing speed as little as possible whilst remaining effective, improving user interfaces and reducing false positives.

The problem is that odds are stuck against the AV vendors:

1. It will get more difficult for AVs to stay light whenever they develop new technologies and functionality to deal with all the known/unknown methods used by viruses (and other Malware) to evade detection.

2. Many websites are not only poorly designed but some are too heavy with pictures, adverts and flash content and it will get harder to blame the AV applications.3. The never ending flurry of browser plug-ins also creates a challenge for AVs to tolerate them.

On my Vista 64-bit EAV seems to be doing fine for ‘lite-browsing’.

 

The doctor

 

the new one in Aviras new suite is very quick. I would say just as fast as F-Secures.

 

I am also an Avira beta tester, but have not installed the new Avira suite- yet. Curious what you have found in terms of http scanning in the new beta suite as opposed to the speed of not scanning http in the Avira Premium.

Dr. G

 

it is the same for me as far as speed. Come on Buck. Start using something that will make your jaw drop.

 

Just installed it and my jaw dropped! Best I have used and lightest-ever by far.

 

antispam is even better then the other guy you like.

 

It appears so-just got a bunch of spam even thought ISP filters it, and it got it all with no FPs. In addition, firewall finally stealths all ports (on high setting). It did not before unless you added a rule.

Best AV/Suite I have ever used- by far. This is a real winner.

 

LOL you don't half talk some junk sometimes jeff

You will have a different opinion,
maybe tomorrow ?