Nod32 or Dr Web

I always use drweb to clean computer first, and then antivir, it always misses and I upload them to drweb. In my opinon, nod32 is not so good as drweb. I find new malware very often for the activity here is much intense than any other place. No one scanner can be sure.

 

If you encounter such a file, please send it to support @ eset.com with a link to this thread so that we can analyse it and tell you why it wasn't detected by NOD32 (possible fp, corrupted file, resource dll, etc.). You should always bear in mind that no AV is perfect. Stuff detected by NOD32 may be undetected by Dr Web and vice-versa.

 

In fact, I am a user of nod32, I also submit to nod, but never get a reply. Maybe some dll is not added, but most of them is get from the infected machine. It can't be fp or corrupted. Yes, no av is perfect, so I always use servral scanner to clean the computer.
I said in my opinion drweb is better than nod32 is that it answer my email and add to database, never get update problem(I still can't update to 1860 now), can clean without installtion and better clean ability.

 

Dr.Web's CureIt Utility is a pretty handy tool to have around, especially for an infected machine.

 

Are you actually a paying user? I for one can always update at the first attempt. If registered users were actually having update issues our forum would already be flooded with complaints. Please continue discussing this issue in the NOD32 thread

 

Yes, but the network here is a little different. I know you don't have server in my country but you sell your product here. Usually, the update won't be a problem except for the big one. I had to wait for a another day, when the server is idle.

 

About 2 or 3 update servers are in my country, the rest is elsewhere (in the US too). I'm quitting discussion about this here as this is not a dedicated NOD32 support forum. If you want to continue discussing it, open a new thread in the NOD32 support forum.

 

Ultimately the decision should come down to effectiveness as nothing else is as important. I personally do not want to use NOD32 but, because of effectiveness, I might have to. I was infected with a rootkit that Dr Web could not detect; C:\WINDOWS\phide_ex.sys - Win32/Delf.NDN trojan.
Suprisingly, only VBA32 and NOD32 could detect this particular piece of malware. I have since sent it to everyone listed here. I prefer Dr Web but security is, and should be, my determining factor.

 

Personally, I cant even fathom trying to combare the detection abilty of these 2. Nods ability to provide protection is vastly superior to Dr. Webs.

 

Why surprisingly ?

 

Yes, I do agree with many of you people. DrWeb is a good antivirus and has been for many years, but I believe that several others have been advancing at a faster pace than DrWeb. Nod32 is most likely leading the pack. About a week or so ago, I picked up a trojan/rootkit that neither Drweb or Kaspersky caught. Believe it or not, BoClean detected it and cleaned it up before being infected. I can't wait to see DrWeb Version 5 to see what major advancements they have come up with.

Barney

 

There are others that didn't catch it that I thought could have; like Kaspersky, But Defender, and Avira. Of course that just goes as further evidence to support what I've always known, that VBA32 does has great heuristics.

 

agreed vba32 does have great heuristics but many false positives if memory serves me correctly.
lodore

 

Presently I prefer DrWeb because of its light footprint and the promising nature of its on-going upgrades.

In case DRW should ever become an "also-ran" at AV-Comparatives (et alia) the top 2 entries on my contingency replacement list are NOD32 & F-Prot 4.

 

I have a licence for Nod 32, also a licence for AVG Professional.

Having read a lot about Dr Web-I tried an evaluation copy, but found it coming up with a few false positives-showing files that I could not find anyway.

Anyone comment on this please?

 

What were the fp's it found. Did you change the settings to check for jokes, dialers, malware, etc.?

 

As you have noticed over at av-comparatives, Dr Web is slipping down the levels and the on-demand detection of zoo malware has dropped from Advanced-Level to now only Standard. In contrast, some other AV's, noticeably AntiVir and Norman have made big improvements of late. So at the present time over at this testing site, Dr Web is grouped in the same detection category as AVG. But I would not use this result to swap Dr Web for AVG

These relatively poor results have been discussed over at the Dr Web Forum and my argument was if they are not going to add all of the missed samples from previous tests and concentrate on ITW threats then maybe they should consider pulling out of testing on this site.

Both in zoo malware, ITW virus testing over at Virus Bulletin and in a recent test of trojan/spyware detection, NOD seems to be much better in overall malware detection. However, all AV's have weaknesses and for me, update procedure needs improving in NOD while the on-demand speed of Dr Web needs improving. I have held licensed versions of these 2 AV's for many years on different computers here and I am happy with both as they are not my first line of Defense.

The stay with it and take a look at these 2 AV's again when the new versions come out next year.

 

It found that a Key Generator that I had contained PSW.Banker Trojan, also a folder containing a collection of Disk tools, had another infection that i cant remember.

Both folders had been scanned by Kaspersky, and also DR Web online scanner, and found to be clean!

I think I adjusted it to check on dialers.

 

NOD32 gets stronger ability of heuristic detection while Drweb does well in unpack

 

For some reason I could not get Dr Web trial to run smoothly on my machine, it caused jumping of the page in IE and general slowdown while surfing so there must have been a conflict somewhere as Dr Web is one of the lightest AV's.
Nod32 does have superior detection overall. At the minute I use nod32 as main AV with Dr Web cureit as a backup.

Londonbeat

 

I take back what I said here-I have just tried it again, and it came up with the same Trojans. However, on checking the logs a bit closer, I discovered that the files in question were in fact filed away on my PC-and were old files I had forgotten about, not the ones I had been testing with Kaspersky etc.

They were downloaded progs that were cracked, and obviously infected-well done DR Web!!!

 

My license for DRW is good until July 2007. I feel comfortable using DRW until that date, because of my other protection. However, if DRW doesn't move up in AV-C's ratings by then, I will look at other AVs -- primarily NOD32 & F-Prot 4, as mentioned above.

It's a good point you made, BC. I just hope the DRW gurus fully understand the implications if they DO pull out. I for one will neither use nor recommend ANY anti-malware program that declines to be tested by AV-C.

 

tough question this thread,

nod32 has the better detection,

but dr.web feels and operates a bit smoother,

i 'personally' would use neither, but as basic as dr.web looks... i do like it

i still dont like all this IMON / AMON / DMON or whatever they are all called, plus all the options inside options, feels like pass the parcel.

both are good, thats fact ... so you choose