Thoughts about PrevX

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Templar, Dec 31, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. IceCube1010

    IceCube1010 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Posts:
    963
    Location:
    Earth

    Yep. I had the same experience. A FP here and there while using the software. However, the guy that post's here for them asked me to submit the files and they had been fixed very quickly. I had all the default settings also. I haven't tried it recently so it could be a lot better.

    Ice
     
  2. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,306
    Quote
    "Everybody should choose product according to their taste, preference and experience not some comparative tests." End Quote

    When I see such comments I have to wonder how you think that someone like me or other average users would arrive at a preference. I cannot test applications, don't know enough to develop a "taste" so I rely on comparative tests. I just have not found how to pull it out of the air.

    If something does not do well on AV Comparatives for example I don't even consider it. If it does well and runs well then it is a reasonable possibility for me. I consider AVC to be the best of the comparative tests, and the least biased. If someone can do better then go for it.

    As to PrevX if it is so great why doesn't everyone use it? I won't deny that it might be an excellent application, but until I see it on something like AV Comparatives I'll go with a good AV. So far it has worked for me.

    Regards,
    Jerry
     
  3. Jav

    Jav Guest

    You see, Jerry.
    This is the problem with most average users.
    They think they don't know enough to develop taste.
    Taste is taste you don't need additional knowledge to develop it.

    Like I don't know anything about chocolate, but I have taste. I know which one I like and which one makes me sick :gack: I don't how they made. maybe some comparative company can claim that the chocolate which makes me think is better than this one and it's more useful for my organism. But...

    Or most comparatives say using Linux is better, but I am not going to use Linux. It's not that I know that from technical point of view Windows. I don't know it, but I know that I feel more comfortable using it.
    But for my friend it's the opposite. It's hell for him to use windows because he developed he like it, not because programs it support or things like that but because it is easy to him to use it.

    Same goes with cars, clothes, anything in our lives. I will see how you feel if I gave you clothes from some super designer who is god of fashion but for you it looks rubbish. Even though noone tells you that it sucks you will still feel uncomfortable. Because you have taste, eventhough you don't know about fashion.

    Same goes to security products.
    ok, you are choosing only between traditional classical AV products.
    But nowadays so many approach for computer security that even IT people get confused some times.
    There are a lot of average users who follow comperatives results, recommendations and good feedback and use for example strong classical HIPS.
    You know what happens? they think that they are perfectly protected as they have program which did best on comparatives.
    They will start getting annoying massages (what did you expected, it's HIPS, it will tell you about evrything what happens on your PC regardless it's being good or bad) (actually that's why it got 100% blocking rate, because on test there were experts sitting and clicking Allow or block and they knew what to block and what to allow)
    but we can't expect the same from average user to be able to tell if he should allow Random_starnge.exe to deploy random_strange_operation and execute Random_Strange process.
    User will sat What the hell?
    1. he will say, whatever and click yes ans yes and yes. (results :thumbd: )
    2. he will say why I should allow what I don't know? (result: why I can't open Internet explorer? :thumbd: )
    3. continue of 2. Ok, I know this stupid program is blocking Internet explore. ok, shut down. open Internet explorer. that's it, :cautious:
    1) leave it off :thumbd:
    2) turn it on and think that you are still protected. but no, it's not virtualazing that IE, so :thumbd:
    4. He will say: ok I know what the hell is it, what are you telling me, I know that I am installing program, just shut up and will turn it off (result: not only damaged nerves but also security has been turned off :thumbd: )

    There are a lot of cases when perfect security will fail because it can't work with the user.

    Another example. People claim that Applocker+LUA+Perfect Firewall+maybe Defencewall+sandboxie+Shadow defender is 100% secure.
    User will download update for Adobe Flash player and will try to install it. Applocker will block it. He is sure that it is legitimate program, so
    1. he will run it as Admin as program asks hem and to evade Applocker with LUA.
    2. He will say defencewall to trust it as he is sure it is legitimate
    3. Will turn off shadow defender because he wants to upgrade it.
    4. Will not run in sandboxie.
    :thumbd:

    everybody will now say that user is idiot and so on. I will say no it's not user.

    ok he will do all security methods.
    1. Will run under sandboxie
    2. Will turn shadow defender on.
    3. Will say defencewall untrust.

    he got warning from HIPS "blah blah blah this will happen if you are installing program blah blah"
    ok, he will say allow.
    now he will look through sandboxie, yeah there are some files in windows, system32, programm files. So what? He dosn't know what to do?
    Same on defencewall logs.
    He will Fail both ways, even if he allows (if it was trojan, rootkit or just keylogger) or denies (if it was just update :doubt: )

    Again everyone will scream that it's not IDIOTproof or things like that.
    but no, user wasn't idiot when he allowed or denied it.
    It was those people who said that he is 100% secure with this combination and have't told user that he had to go through all this. They didn't tell him that this combination wasn't made for him but made for people who understands it.
    Maybe they did, but cooperatives will not tell you this.

    It's not just average users or user who don't know. It happens even with experts.
    Again like some HIPS kind of program:
    1. Average user will not understand what the hell is going on with all those pop-ups:
    a) will allow everything
    b) will deny everything
    c) will just guess (get a coin and if it's heads deny, tails allow) :p
    d) Will turn it off
    2. above average user will now what is happening, but will get fed up that it annoys you telling that and that and tuns it off. (but he thought he knows what's going on, but he was mistaken :doubt: )
    3. Expert user will get some program which is meant for users in number 1 and starting doing some test and experiment.
    But he will fail aswell, and will get annoyed that this program which is claimed best one, isn't telling or asking him anything and doing everything itself.
    So he will fail believing that he will be warned if something happens, but this program isn't meant to warn ... :blink:

    So user isn't Idiot.
    ok, user was stupid that he followed pure recommendations not meant to his type of user or comparatives which were too general.

    Guilty is all those people who recommended it, without knowing you, without even trying to understand you.
    And funny thing is they are the one who will call you Idiot when something happens...

    That's what I call taste, that's what I call preference!
    Some people like pop-up, some hate it.
    Some people like locking them down, some hate.
    and etc etc...

    So believe me you HAVE taste, "it's nothing to do knowing enough to develop taste"

    Everybody loves cakes. everybody thinks and tells that cakes are best thing to buy on birthday and celebration.
    I hate it, I can't stand it.. o_O

    See.. :doubt:

    P.S. Sorry for Off topic.
    I didn't realize I wrote so much. until I pressed post and looked at it

    EDIT: and it's not just HIPS, it goes for evry aspect of the security, False positives, virtualization, Anti Execution and so on.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 3, 2010
  4. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    Such a true post.
     
  5. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,741
    Location:
    UK
    I wouldn't choose an AV purely based on results of tests done by organisations like AV-C. Most of these tests are using large sample sets collected from areas of the 'net some of us are likely to never tread. How we use our computer and where we go on the 'net determines to a great extent how free from viruses we can be. This is evident with those people who say they've never caught viruses or they're apparently virus-free even after scanning with products X, Y & Z.

    Yes, it is good to know how well products are doing in these tests, but it's possible things can change next time round so we mustn't fall into the trap, as some people do, of changing AV just because it did better that time.
     
  6. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    What?! Don't change our programs around every time an AV drops a percentage point or when some doofus posts a new YouTube video? Why, this is Wilders, and that's heresy I say! Okay, back to seriousness, you're spot on with your comments. The only possible disagreement I might have is certain malware only being in certain areas of the net. That kind of statement brings up the days of "Don't go porn surfing and you won't get infected.

    We all know these days that's bs. Malware can go from POC to in the wild in a matter of days, and can move from the "darkest corners of the web" to the most trusted websites in hours. It only takes a determined bad guy and/or a foul-up from a programmer or admin.
     
  7. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,306
    I do appreciate the comments. However, I continue to depend upon those tests in which I have confidence in their integrity.

    Although I do have some interest in security applications, I do not have the interest to delve into them and learn about computers to the degree necessary to not have to depend upon tests by others.

    So I acknowledge I do not have the knowledge or equipment to perform my own tests, and will continue to depend upon others, and especially AV Comparatives.

    While I do not change each time a new best is revealed, it is important that protection is my first priority after the ability to run smoothly on my systems.

    I have been using F-Secure, Avira, and now KIS 2010. All plus Avast have run well on my systems, and so any would work. I do prefer the higher rated ones when I have some other reason to change.

    So far it has worked for me.

    Thanks again, and have a good week.

    Regards,
    Jerry
     
  8. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,642
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    @Jav,

    A suggestion for those experiencing what you wrote above: An old plain and simple "antivirus-only" solution.

    Pick whichever you like and forget about the paranoia makers ;)
     
  9. Jav

    Jav Guest

    Yeah, in a way it will deal with some problems, but...

    Progress isn't staying on the one place, everything is developing.
    I will not even go into that pure signature based security isn't enough nowadays and so on, it was discussed a lot of time, so let's leave it.

    When I said progress is moving and evrything developing, I meant you can;t find pure old traditional "AV-solutions" anymore.
    Look around, there are NO such program left.
    Why:
    1. Because Malware developed, signature based AV can'y stop it
    2. Because of the paranoia and buzz made by media and forums like that, so people choose more advanced security setup ( even if they don't understand it)
    3. Because pure AVs aren;t scoring good on some Comparatives, so people who follow cooperatives (and there a lot of them) stoped buying them.

    So either developers were out of business or they developed new technologies and added them into it.

    ok, show me atleast one pure AV?
    Now they have heurastic scanning, behaviour blocking, Cloud scanning, Insight protection, Intrusion Protection, Sandboxie, virtualization, rollback, and long list.
    it's the same for any of those top AVs in your comparatives...
    now even Acronis (company well known for making back-up and imagining programs) creates Internet Security.

    And there are also False Positives, some programs have such a great sensitivity level that it will block from changing your own background picture.
    But no, what will our average used do?
    He will look into comparative:
    Blah blah product ---- Detection Rate 99,837834 % of all tested 1.000 malware which are from Chinese site you will never visit.
    *small note: but blah blah product also blocked 200 legitimate programs

    But he will look into detection and say wow and get it.
    And continue is the same as in the previous post...
     
  10. nomarjr3

    nomarjr3 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Posts:
    502
    I heard it detects a lot of FPs.. which isn't really a good thing
     
  11. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,787

    It does. In fact probably more than any other program I have used.
     
  12. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,642
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    Still, by running just an "av-only" program (and DO learn how to use it) will avoid you of having way more headaches caused by those extra unnecessary (IMO) security features. I think that the single av-solution is still the main and the most important software security package for every PC out there and it's reflected in their prices, as compared with the cost (a small difference) of the overrated "internetsecurity/suite" boxes.

    In my opinion, I don't consider vital the security features underlined in your quote above.

    sorry for the OT post, let's get back to topic ;)
     
  13. disinter1

    disinter1 Guest

    My thought on Prevx is that it is TOO EXPENSIVE!
     
  14. Fajo

    Fajo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Posts:
    1,814
    People say this about all AV's or software they have to buy. Normally means they just want something for nothing. But maybe that's just my view.
     
  15. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,787

    I agree. I got Norton 3pc/2yr license for $6.50 on ebay. Hard to justify the cost of Prevx when you can get other software so much cheaper.
     
  16. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    but with ebay ur taking a risk of it being a license meant specifically for a certain region and become eventually blacklisted or it being an already in use license/keygen serial.

    u might have never had an issue, but its always a risk.
     
  17. Ibrad

    Ibrad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Posts:
    1,972
    Prevx has a free version :D
     
  18. Jav

    Jav Guest

    @Macstorm
    Yeap, again, in a way I agree with you.
    But unfortunately Media and Marketing makes most users choose those programms with added features over simple products even if they will never benefit from those added features.
    Your option of choosing AV-only products may work.
    But in some aspects of this topic, I can see we have different opinions, But as you said let's get to the topic. (as this is long discussion and deserves it's own thread) ;)
    And I apologize for all this Off Topic from all readers.

    Which doesn't have remove option and real-time protection. :cautious:
     
  19. Ibrad

    Ibrad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Posts:
    1,972
    It may not have remove files it detects in real time but if you scan each file with the free version before running the file it will kinda provide some protection :D
     
  20. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,787
    I have probably purchased between 5-10 software apps off ebay and never had issues. But you can also get Norton and other popular AV aps from buy.com, amazon, tigerdirect, newegg, etc. for really cheap or even free after rebate.
     
  21. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,787
    As someone else mentioned, it does not remove unless you pay. As with the frequency of false positives, it creates a interesting marketing scenario.
     
  22. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    6,219
    Location:
    USA
    .
    I think the marketing strategy is pretty clear - they want to get the program out there so they offer limited functionality for free and full functionality with a license. That is typical.

    Regarding false positives I don't understand why this is considered a big deal, especially for advanced users. In my experience with running Prevx on two systems for a few months I only had one false positive. I uploaded it, they verified it and updated the program - end of story. FP's are more of a concern for newbies who don't know how to respond to them. That's what support is for.

    And regarding price, it's important to remember that companies like Symantec have an enormous user base. They often almost give away their programs via rebates to get more people using them and make the money back on subscription renewals. Those of us who work the system and get the "paid" products for free or very little are being subsidized.
     
  23. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,787
    Yes and no. When you offer a program that has decent amount of FPs, and then the free version asks people to pay to remove them, this is a significant issue for less experienced(i.e. normal) users. I won't install it on any of my friends or families PCs for this reason. Sure, I feel comfortable using it because I have confidence in my ability to tell what is a real problem and what isn't, but the average user may pay to upgrade when they are not really infected at all.

    In a sense with the model prevx uses, it could be argued it is in their benefit to have a lot of FPs, as it might result in more paid subscriptions. I do not believe this is their intent, but I could understand someone feeling that way.

    Most companies that offer free AV software, remove items they find for free. (MBAM, SAS, AVAST, ANTIVIR, AVG, Adaware, spybot, etc....)
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2010
  24. guest

    guest Guest

    So you say Prevx should only be used by advanced users then? ;)
    I don't think they like to hear that. :cool: - But it's sadly true, sort of.

    You can't trust Prevx if it finds something that this is really malware!

    (Of course you can never be sure, not even if you ask virustotal etc.
    for another opinion, but there are in my experience other av solutions
    available that would make me really nervous - going RED! Speaking
    for myself after long time using it -> Prevx not so much! :)
    And that is a danger in itself .. you drop your guard.

    And in case you have some dubious keygen there is no harm done if that
    is not executed, right. - But in my long history with Prevx I had so
    many, many false positives that were just normal applications or drivers.

    And people who don't have a clue get panic if they see RED,
    kill those things and maybe then some software doesn't start,
    maybe windows doesn't start ... or they call you anytime of day
    or night for advise if something pops up ;) ..

    ... and therefore it is VERY important to have as few
    false positives as possible! - Exactly because of those
    users that cannot know if this is a real danger or just
    a fp and THEN a real danger to kill it! - There are millions
    of them out there and most of them are not active here
    on wilders and often just know where the power button is. ;)

    Of course that depends how many programs you have installed
    and if you are not using cracks and stuff and what not. Many
    people can tell you very different stories. I am one of them. ;)

    But as I said: I saw to many completely harmless (!) things
    considered as bad by prevx and once that SafeOnline thing
    is done I would really wish they concentrate on minimizing fp's.

    Just today I was remotely connected to a system of a relative.
    They had deleted some things that Prevx out of nowhere
    found even if the day before all was fine (those files where
    on hdd long time). One of them was completely
    harmless, o.k. the others were fp's too of course. ;)
    So I restored this one from 'quarantine' and checked
    again with Prevx right mouse function:
    No threat anymore detected. Great, isn't it? ;)

    This user would have at some point had a problem with
    his DVB software. Because he trusted Prevx doing the right thing.

    But he/you cannot, unfortunately! (Just telling you my experience.)

    There is another av-solution installed where in my experience
    in 9 of 10 cases is a real danger detected. - But you see .. that
    program is always very quiet. Won't tell you the name.
    And can't recommend it for other reasons either. ;)

    Newbies don't even know what you mean with support
    or how to get there or what to write then. In my case
    they don't speak english at all - I wonder how long it
    takes for multilanguage GUI, I remember v2 (?) and
    that there was a german version back then -
    and so they don't understand anything else
    than RED must mean it's DANGEROUS ...
    end of world is near ... bank account half empty ..
    let's panic and push some buttons! ;)

    My Prevx wishes for 2010:

    - 100% working, reliable SafeOnline
    - multilanguage GUI (german at least, the old folk has computers too! :)
    - much fewer false positives
    - history of deleted files that is saved automatically
    (so that one can later see, what those clueless relatives
    thought would be dangerous and why nothing is working anymore! ;) )

    (Maybe this 'save scan results' button saves not only the very last scan, but I don't know this at the moment.)

    Btw: The price could be always 'better' (=lower) for customers, right? ;)
    But once you have been rescued by some product you pay this gladly.
    Exactly that happend, when that other - not named - solution completely
    failed! Since then I am a customer. :)

    In my case I am using this year free licenses. :D
    But next year it should really not be much more expensive
    as it is now or Prevx should better find this year many
    - real and not only scary! :) - malwares that slip through
    my other av-solution: Avira Premium. - Also known for
    too much false positives. :)
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2010
  25. disinter1

    disinter1 Guest

    My Prevx wishes for 2010:

    To stop being money hungry and have a decent price per year like around the $20 range. This is my wish so please keep your negative comments to yourself, thank you.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.