Prevx 3.0 or DefenseWall, im confused which to recommend.

I have experience with DefenseWall 2.56 (i dont need a firewall in my hips).
I havent really tried Prevx 3.0, but i saw a video on youtube my mrzios, and Prevx does excellent work stopping driveby malware installation too.

Which once should i recommend to my friends?

 

Both are different and would work well together. Both are highly recommendable. Matt did a review of DW also. It also stopped all malware.

 

I use them both at the same time. If Prevx did happen to miss something Defensewall is there to take care of it.

 

DefenseWall if you gotta choose between these two. Enough said about those choices.

 

With the new defenseWall beta v.6 its stops all that fake anti virus stuff. If your using the old one 2.56 I think it is no good against the new threats . Has like 3 holes in it so things get through it. here is the link for the beta one out. http://gladiator-antivirus.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=97701

 

When DefenseWall V3 is released, a version without the firewall will also be released. So don't worry, the firewall is only optional (but it is compatible with other firewalls )

 

i use them both hey the firewall from defensewall is cool indeed tested it my self

 

ive owned both, and as you can see from my signature, i made my choice

Prevx is just sooo much more than a 'trust nothing' and you dont be infected type of program.

.. although, i do like DW

 

Thanks for the quick replys guys!
I did not expect that people would be using both of them at the same time!
That really dosent help me lol, because my friend is going to buy only one of the two, and he already uses a router with Zonealarm firewall.

So, what would you pick for him?
He uses firefox, visits a lot or xxx sites, but does it with no-script, and uses AVG free.
He also very rarely gets infected. The last time was probably a year ago, and that infection was thru a pendrive.

Speaking of USB flash pendrives, i know Dwall is great at stopping any executions from it,
any idea how Prevx does on the usb autorun.inf malware?
Does Prevx have an option to 'run usb sticks as untrusted'?

 

Thanks for the tip!

 

that is good to know!

 

First you changed my advice to Prevx, then I came to the USB-part, and it's back to DW again. Well, at least v3.

 

Yep, the USB infections are a concern usually, BUT he already has an application that takes care of USB infections, stops them from 'autorunning'.
Its called USB Disk Security, and it creates AUTORUN.INF folders in all your disk drives, including your pen drive, so that even if you insert a pendrive into an infected pc to do a cleanup, the virus cant jump on your pendrive, as an autorun.inf folder is already created. Plus, the folder cannot be deleted,lol.
http://www.zbshareware.com/download.html
http://fr.brothersoft.com/screenshots/src/342/04419342.4e6f8c8c5fcfa7bb3ed3d2b93d8183cb.jpg

So, we are back, which do i recommend for him.

 

From what I've seen Prevx should be easier to handle, but I've not tested the latest beta of v3 (DW). About the USB-infection prevention... that's the same approach as Rising PC Doctor then.

 

Given your specified alternatives (Prevx vs DW) I recommend that your friend run DW-HIPS & Prevx-free together in real-time.

Thus, your friend would buy only one license (DW), but still have pretty much the best of both worlds.

 

Remember that PrevX still works in cloud - it is based-on blacklists software which offers you Detection level of protection, while DefenseWall offers Prevention which is more important layer these days.

 

I have got a few questions

1. On which Operating System is your friend

2. Why is he using FireFox?

3. Why do you not require an outbound firewall (at the moment I am also running without an outbound, simple becasue I do think chances something getting in are so low, I do not need a post-intrusion outbound layer)

Regards Kees

 

Hi Kees, he is running XP SP3 32bit (His laptop came with vista, which was uninstalled. He hates Vista.)
He is running Firefox because he has more confidence in the security of that browser than IE or opera.
He has an outbound firewall, Zonealarm Pro.

 

Simular setup with paranoid friend
I have a friend and he is quite paranoid regarding his PC. Strangely I can not convince him to run as Limited User (he also dislikes kernel patch protection, because with patch protection has nobody to check the OS and he does not trust Microsoft)

So he runs Windows 7 x32 plus
- DefenseWall
- PrevX *
- Chrome **

* PrevX settings
- Apply ADVANCED heuristics AFTER Age/popularity
- Set AGE heuristics to HIGH
- set Popularity to MEDIUM
This will force PrevX to have a very critical look at new programs (meaning new on your PC). Benefit is that for this high level of security you do not waist CPU cycles on older programs (when your are not infected this is the obvious choice). So in terms of benefits/overhead is an excellent setup.

** Chrome
Chrome has a lot of usefull plug-ins/extentions (like FireFox). The benefit of Chrome's internal Sandbox is that it accesses less suspicious resources (files and registry keys). This obvious has the advantage that DefenseWall has t ocheck less, so when using Chrome you will see a drop in CPU time of DefenseWall. Chrome has some essential extentions: New Tab Behaviour (to tell Chrome what to do when a new tab is started), IE-tab (for compatability), Adsweep (a highly efficient Adblock), Flashblock, SiteAdvisor for Chrome and WOT for chrome. So using Chrome reduces the overhead of DW security.

When using DefenseWall with bad designed programs (e.g. FireFox), it has to do a lot more checking. All Chrome tabs are sandboxed and run with LOW integrity, IE8 can even run in Protected mode (LOW integrity). Think about this: FireFox runs by default in MEDIUM level integrity and it does not install its plugins in the user space, but in the admin space (!).

Thoughts
ZoneAlarm versus DefenseWall V3
I am quite impressed with DWv3, you will see it will score higher on Matousec than ZA PRO. The overhead of DW's FW is minimal, I would really give it a try over ZA Pro

Chrome versus FireFox
Chrome is a lot safe than FF. With DW you do need no-script, but with the latest Chromium you can set all content releated stuff yourself (so when you want you can cripple your browser's functionality. Chrome is a fast and modern (from a software architecture point of view) browser. He should give it a try also.

Performance considerations
Choosing DWv3 over ZA Pro and Chrome over FireFox with efficient PrevX settings will make his PC "fly" compared to current setup (drop AVG also, install Hitman Pro and scan on demand occasionally). Nice thing all mentioned programs have trial period, so he can check it out for himself.


Regards Kees

 

thanks Kees for the Prevx settings.

 

Trjam, some remarks

This is a performance increase with security gain when you run it with DefenseWall on XP or have UAC on on VIsta/Windows7 or run as limited user (any OS). This second line policy management safety net reduces the need of checking all programs.

What I am saying: on XP without defensewall or Vista/Windows7 without (full) UAC using the admin account, I would not use Heuristics AFTER, but keep it the default Heuristics BEFORE.

Regards Kees

Sorry friend, but Plato said:
"when an advice is viable in all situations it is so generic it will not provide much benefits in a specific situation".

 

is prevx free even worth it tho because it cant remove? opinions?

 

ofcourse it is if you know how to use the roll back feature(defensewall) as prevx free will tell you about the infection for free then defensewall will remove the infected file

 

Now thats smart!

 

Thanks for the informative reply Kees, i have Chrome installed on my laptop, just never really used it, im so used to firefox also.