"Very badly catches viruses"?

Er, could the reason that the scan is slower (or slowest), is because it looks for and finds a LOT more NOD32 does? Like, you know, other malware...

 

Just my personal opinion but I think KAV is trying to do too much.

I prefer a fast scanner like NOD, using AH in IMON and AH to check downloads, and also a layered approach like Ad-adware, etc. then having KAV set to try to detect everything and running very slow.

I feel much more comfortable using NOD with AH and a layered approach then just totally relying on KAV to catch all.

Over the last 3 years using NOD and a layered approch nothing has been missed that KAV would have detected, YMMV.

 

Why is there seemingly so much animosity for Kav from Nod users and for Nod from Kav users?If you have chosen one over the other it is obvious that your priorities lie in the strengths of that particular product:-speed,AH with Nod:-detection of a greater variety of malware with Kav.I use both(on different pc's)and they are BOTH 1st class products.
Kaspersky is in the business of selling/promoting Kaspersky products and if he can do this while criticising competiters products it is even better (from his point of view)his comments about Nod should really be taken with a pinch of salt:- its to try and increase HIS OWN COMPANY sales!
On another point an earlier post it was impied that an AV relying on defs is inferior to one employing AH I prefer to rely on defs (as long as updates are speedy)I look at it akin to myself picking up an infection:- I would prefer a treatment that is known to target the offending bugs rather than rely one that might covers a wide variety of ailments and MIGHT cure me

 

I have used both KAV and NOD. I think they are both good products.

I like the fact that NOD's definition updates are also speedy and at the same time NOD has AH.

 

Steve1955 hit the nail on the head when he said

 

Well then, if I may ask, what products do you use that you feel cover all your bases that KAV covers...

I agree NOD32 is good, it's just that I fel NOD32 misses a lot of stuff others don't.. (Virus Bulletin doesn't cover everything)...
Thanks

 

by that logic, one would rationalize that the others miss a lot of stuff that NOD32 catches. (Due to NOD's superior vb100 record)

 

My logic? LOL.. My logic is the "Real World".. where I was noticing that NOD32 was NOT detecting stuff that other AV's would find...especially KAV.. I am not in the mood to go hunt down posts from here and other places to prove my point. I am not in the mood to begin a flame war.. I am asking a question to Stan999, I don't need a smart aleck answer from you...VB to me, by the way.. is not THAT impresive..... AND I SAID TO ME.. Not, you, or anyone else.. TO ME!

 

Hi Straight Shooter.

I use NOD32, an AT and Spy Sweeper. For me that layered combination has provided excellent coverage.

Do you use any other product like Ad-aware, Spy Sweeper, etc. in addition to KAV or do you feel KAV covers it all?

Thanks,

 

i wasn't trying to be a smart aleck, sorry if it sounded that way. i was just trying to say that one av may find this but not that and another will do the opposite. i know vb100 isn't the real world, but to mee it just seems if it passes
that much more frequently than another av, that perhaps it finds things that others dont.

 

I apoligize.. I kinda feel like I have to be "on guard" here at the Nod Forum.. I used to use it but I found it VERY lacking in malware detection except ITW.. especially with Trojans... To test my theory., what I did was go to a porn site a fellow told me about at DSLR.. and what happened? Well, I had two computers then, now I only have one.. So I can't repeat this... and maybe now NOD32 WILL find these trojans... Just by going to a website... I don't know.. but when I did my "test", KAV found the trojans, NOd32 didn't.. With Sir Carew submitting samples, perhaps NOD32 will find them now... VB to me is nice, but when one AV stops trojans (NAV did too,) and another doesn't, and my AT didn't too, incidentially, then I wonder...
Regardless, sorry I flew off the handle.

 

Blame Mele20 for that LOL...

 

Ok Folks,

this thread was supposed to be a discussion about comments Eugene Kaspersky made about Nod32 but it seems to
have veered off into another endless Kav vs Nod thread so unless everyone gets back to what this thread was orginally about, then sooner rather than later it will be closed.


snowbound

 

In addition to Kav, I use Spysweeper, Trojan Hunter, and ZAPro..
Most of the time, KAV will catch it all.. Version 4.5 ran fine, but 5.0 kills my laptop for 6 minutes or so when I start from a cold boot.. Sure, Scanning takes about an hour, but then again, it covers a lot more than nod32. As for Heuristics, well, I'm still not convienced... Also, what worries me when I used NOD32 is the LEVEL of archive scanning it did, although I read (Firefighter) that it does better now... Reading Eugene's comments made me think there was some validity to his statements.. , even though I know he is trying to sell his product...So, I attempt to bring the thread back on topic by saying the way I see it, Eugene's comments didn't seem THAT "bad", and although "very bad catches Viruses" was a stupid remark, I think he should have said.. "very bad catches malware, trojans, etc... "...Since I am getting frustrated with the long memory freeze ups with KAV, then I wonder, what will I have to get in addition to NOD32, if I went back to NOD32, to cover EVERYTHING... That's all...

 

I use the combiantion of NOD32, Outpost Firewall, SpywareBlaster and a good old Linksys router. I think that in conjunction with safe habits works pretty well. Though if it looks like i'm missing something obvious, let me know!

 

Norky,

Please stick to the topic at hand. If u want to discuss something else open a new thread in the appropriate forum.


snowbound

 

I agree, and I just did..

Okay everybody, follow me here! (LOL)...

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=30335

 

> Why is there seemingly so much animosity for Kav from Nod users and for Nod from Kav users?

Last year it was all about "NAV vs NOD32". NAV started to lose favor with its fervent supporters, and it became "AVG vs NOD32". AVG started to lose favor with its fervent supporters, and now we're into the "KAV vs NOD32" period. Next month it will be "PoopScan vs NOD32". Go figure!

Every antivirus program has its fervent supporters. Some are fervent about a program simply because it's "their" program of choice. Some are fervent about a program because they've used other AVs and found it better suited to their own systems and purposes.

Every antivirus program has its fervent opposition. Some fervently oppose all other programs because they think "theirs" is best. Some fervently oppose "Program X" simply because its supporters are fervent ... and the occasional clown becomes rabid because "Program X's" supporters made him look foolish.

Every forum has its resident "virus experts" who think they know more than everyone else on the board, who go out of their way to cause arguments about the most talked-about AV program of the week, no matter what it is.

> If you have chosen one over the other it is obvious that your priorities lie in the strengths of that particular product:- speed, AH with Nod:- detection of a greater variety of malware with Kav.

Horses for courses. You use whatever you think is best suited to your own system and requirements.

> I use both (on different pc's) and they are BOTH 1st class products.

Yes, they are.

> On another point an earlier post it was impied that an AV relying on defs is inferior to one employing AH I prefer to rely on defs (as long as updates are speedy) I look at it akin to myself picking up an infection:-

The millions of people infected with CIH, LoveLetter, Melissa, Badtrans, and literally hundreds of other new viruses before their antivirus vendors released defs to detect them ... viruses that were heuristically detected and blocked on first sight by NOD32 ... would disagree.

With "definitions only", AV vendors first need samples before they can create updates, then time to create those updates. The time lag between "appearance" and "cure" means someone ... usually hundreds/thousands/millions of someones ... is infected.

Last month's "big name" email-borne viruses were Netsky.Q and Bagle.Z/AB. Some sources report their combined damage and cleanup costs as running into billions of dollars. NOD32's Advanced Heuristics (IMON) detected and blocked them both on first sight ... without updates.

> I would prefer a treatment that is known to target the offending bugs rather than rely one that might covers a wide variety of ailments and MIGHT cure me.

I would prefer that no malware existed at all, and that we could use our computers productively or for entertainment without the constant fear that something nasty was likely to invade our hard drives ... but that will never happen.

The panacea anti-malware program will never happen either.

No single program or combination of programs can guarantee 100% protection against viruses, worms, Trojans, spyware, adware, browser hijackers, porn diallers, hacker attacks, popups, tracking cookies, and all the other malicious crapware that lurks on the Internet waiting to bite you ... but I think (and statistics show) that your best protection is to use top-of-the-range programs for each specific malware type.

(Sorry ... I wandered off the "Why is there seemingly so much animosity for Kav from Nod users and for Nod from Kav users?" topic. Blame it on Alzheimer's.)

 

> VB to me, by the way.. is not THAT impresive..... AND I SAID TO ME.. Not, you, or anyone else.. TO ME!

Have you ever read Virus Bulletin, Jim ... or do you just look at the VB100 awards ?

 

> I apoligize.. I kinda feel like I have to be "on guard" here at the Nod Forum..

Why ?

> I used to use it but I found it VERY lacking in malware detection except ITW..

If I send a few obscure viruses to selected vendors (but not to PoopScan), wait until said vendors release updates, then hit the forums screaming "Look everybody! PoopScan doesn't detect these viruses!", would you fall for it again ?

> especially with Trojans...

Some antivirus programs do find more Trojans than NOD32 ... but they don't find as many ITW viruses ... and ITW viruses are those most likely to cause you problems!

(They don't find as many Trojans as the better dedicated anti-Trojan programs either!)

 

> Most of the time, KAV will catch it all..

I guess "Most of the time" says it all, Jim.

"Most of the time" NOD32 catches ITW viruses before KAV.

"Most of the time" dedicated ATs catch ITW Trojans before KAV.

 

> As for Heuristics, well, I'm still not convienced...

You would be convinced if you were one of the millions of computer users infected by Netsky.Q before the first vendor released his update.

Only one Australian NOD32 user was infected with Netsky.Q ... and that was traced to a staff member ignoring the heuristic warning and bypassing IMON "because the email was from Microsoft".

(We can't protect you from yourself!)

 

> Also, what worries me when I used NOD32 is the LEVEL of archive scanning it did,

A grenade in a box remains harmless until you open the box and pull out the pin.

The fact that PoopScan can detect a virus buried beneath 3256 levels of zip/rar/whatever archiving might look good in advertising, but it doesn't impress me.

 

NOD32 has detected Sasser.A worm before KAV. I'm agree with rodzilla, many times, NOD add detections to ITW viruses before KAV. I don't understand how, because KAV release updates every 3 hours.