What makes a good A/V

I've enjoyed reading this forum to get some ideas about a new antivirus program. I must admit though the levels of paronoia I am reading is quite remarkable. People running 2 or 3 A/V The makers of these products have done a wonderful job convincing us of the dangers.
So here is the view of a typical home user on what constitutes a good antivirus.
1. It doesn't stuff up a well configured PC.
2. It detects 100% of viruses in the wild.
3. It had reasonable ability to detect unknown new threats.
4. It had low effect on the speed of the PC.

Everything else is icing on the cake.

I'd be interested in other people's views.

 

I also like it to have a good updater with fairly regular updates and it is nice if the initial cost isn't to high but not a prerequisit. and simple enough for the average user to be able to configure it with out being an expert. and the updates need to be automatic and dependable.

bigc

 

I agree with what you have listed an would add:

It must be easy to use an maintain. (Updates should be quick an easy an always current).

It should have the ability to fix any threat it detects.

Pay versions should have excellent support centers if necessary.

It should detect all the possible threats not just viruses.

Thanks
Wildman

 

Thanks guys.
My reason for posting this is to try to "clear the air" for those less tech knowledgable. I agree regular updates are important.
I do get a bit tired of reading people comparing A/V products based on their ability to detect zoo viruses that realistically pose no threat. Also, for the average user, the threats to their PC's have been greatly overstated. I understand that many who use the forum here browse website that (in the words of Micky Molloy) "are fraught with peril".
Over the years I have used a range of antivirus products... McAfee, AVP 3.5, Nav 2003, & more recently AVG, Avast & NOD32. Currently trialing Bitdefender 8 Standard.
A word on the use of computer resources. This is both subjective & objective. If your antivirus makes your PC feel slower... this is prob more a negative than how much memory is used.

 

Most people on this forum from what I can see run one antivirus in real time with a second antivirus on demand only. While some may consider that paranoid others would call it prudent and their setups are often the result of getting bitten thmselves or cleaning up the mess for others. They also preach a layered security setup which is an approch now being taken up by the mainstream media. But to keep thing s on topic a simple GUI is vital for the average user.

 

1. It doesn't stuff up a well configured PC.
2. It detects 100% of viruses in the wild. (AND DETECTS MOST WORMS AND TROJANS)
3. It had reasonable ability to detect unknown new threats.
4. It had low effect on the speed of the PC.

I have seen the dangers. The last computer I cleaned had over 200 viruses and over 600 peices of spyware and junk. The worst had over 1200 viruses!

 

This is the kind of retoric I am referring to. Looking at the Viruses in the Wild List Feb 2005, 1911 viruses are listed (http://www.f-secure.com/virus-info/wild.html). To suggest that a PC had 1200 of them is simply nonsense, unless the owner had access to a variety of zoo virus samples. Of course now... realising that my PC could be so badly infected with thousands of viruses & trojans... I will immediately go out & secure my PC with a variety of antivirus, antitrojan & antispyware programs.
Give me a break.
Of course it is sensible to run a current. up to date antivirus program. More important is to show some common sense in computing habits. And please lets stop the hysteria.

 

I'm sorry, I MEANT 1200 INFECTED FILES. THE OWNER WAS A PROUD USER OF KAZAA AND VENTURED TO EVERY PORN SITE IMAGINABLE. I WILLING TO BET OVER 90% OF THE MEMBERS HERE HAVE BEEN INFECTED BY A VIRUS OR SPYWARE AT ONE TIME.

Not hysteria. Not rhetoric.

Go ahead. Use nothing. That's the genius thing to do.

I thought Wilder's is here for members to trade opinions, ideas and knowledge about computer security. But I now find out it's all hysteria. Thanks for the info.
Everyone here must be hysterical.

 

Yes, It is essential to run a good AV and keep it current. Beyond that it is difficult if you have a large number of computers on a widely dispersed network, many of them laptops users on the move. We have this situation and we find that a good AV meets our needs.

Many of the people in there forums are home users and they can easily have layers of defence and they are certaily more protected than those on a widely dispersed network. A very small number of people in the forums are certainly prone to hysteria, but the risks are certainly there if you do not practice safe hex.

Dick

 

.
.
.
5. Very good incremental update
6. Easy to use and a nice GUI
7. Fast reaction against new threats
8. Release new signatures almost every days

 

Sorry.. I didn't mean to offend. Obviously challenging more experienced opinions isn't acceptable. Of course it's necessary to run a good quality, updated antivirus. Practicing sensible computing is even more important. But I am still of the opinion that the running of multiple antivirus progs is overkill for the average sensible user. Also, if you're not file sharing or going porn shopping the risk is minimal as most internet users will testify to.
I'm not suggesting for a minute that there is no risk... but I would suggest that it is overstated.

 

richo,

I'm not sure how you come to this conclusion from the content of this thread, though it is usually helpful to focus on the factual content of the discussion and leave the subjective issues behind. What you might label as a hysterical response could also seem to be quite rational to someone else based on their different knowledge and experience.

I am a chemist by training. I've run across many instances of "hysterical responses" within my technical area by the untrained simply because they did not have the technical background to make an informed analysis. By the same token, I've also encountered instances of casually accepted behavior that have left me absolutely aghast. This situation is no different, I've also observed both ends of the spectrum within computer security.

Has it occurred to you that sensible computing really means very little to the vast majority of casual users? Determining whether ones practices are sensible or not may require a level of knowledge that many people neither possess nor have an inclination to develop. For most, using a computer is like using a car. They want to get somewhere, not develop a fine appreciation for auto mechanics and Newtonian physics.

Based on the content of this site, I don't think you'll get an argument that multiple AV programs is probably not the best course on which to spend limited resources. On the other hand, there is a fair amount of discussion regarding the use of mutiple security focused applications which target distinctly different domains, be it an AV augmented by a dedicated AT and/or some proactive measure such as process control or dedicated registry protection. My question to you is are you confusing these two very different situations?

While I'd agree that some users pile on multiple security related applications without regard to the degree to which they provide either complementary or
duplicative coverage, this is more a reflection of their limited experience than raw hysteria. In time, their choices will typically evolve and follow a more considered strategy.

Finally, in all instances users are attempting to address an unknown future risk. The behavior of someone who is intrinsically risk-adverse may appear to be hysterical to another who has a high tolerance to risk. By the same token, the practices of a user comfortable with a high level of risk may dumbfound those who are risk-adverse. In any event, one camp labelling the other misses the point. Both extremes can be very reasonable behaviors under given circumstances by specific individuals. The trick is knowing in which camp you sit by demeanor, where you should probably sit by experience and knowledge, and whether there is a disconnect in these two states.

Blue

 

Maybe it's because someone started yelling at him.

And then they through in a good dose of sarcasm.

 

Well, I never get too excited when someone's Caps Lock key gets stuck. I try to look at content, not the case of the letters used.

There was a somewhat inappropriate level of sarcasm on both sides of the aisle here, which I would hope all posters would strive to avoid.

As I said previously, focus on the factual content of the discussion and leave the subjective issues behind. That approach has served me well over time. It is very easy to miss the emotional intent of comments, and that miss can occur from either side of a discussion.

Blue

 

I was talking to a computer tech guy yesterday who works for a bank. He says I should have: 1. a router. 2.an antivirus program. 3. a dedicated AT. 4. at least two anti-spyware programs before I were even to try online banking. And believe me this guy has seen damage done. Paranoid is really strong and will get people's backs up. Lets say " overly cautious instead". And challenge away. People on the forum really enjoy championing their position and have been seen to change their position if you have a better reasoned arguement.
i should add that many people here enjoy playing around with security programs and finding out how they work and their setup may reflect that. If you want to find out how a progran works and how well. This the place to come as users will cut right through any manufacturer's propaganda.

 

A good AV is one that stops malware from ruining my PC so that I do not have to reformat it when I do not feel like it. I put every important file on a datastick then secure delete that file from my computer. As for banking (I am in Canada) I really do not have that much concern. Banks here (Sorry I don't know what the rest of the world does) insure your money for this kind of thing up to $60,000 on personal accounts and I would think that if you have more than that in a 2% interest account you should probably talk to a financial advisor. I would however build a very secure PC if I were to do my investment and stocks on the PC as this could become a problem if not secure enough.

 

http://www.techhelpers.net/e4u/comp/comp26.gif

I have been burned three (3) times now, the last costing me my "old" machine. I thought I practiced safe computing, but obviously this wasn't enough. So call me paranoid if you wish, but past bad experiences will have a tendency to do that to one. I once again try an use every program that will inform me of a potential problem, I leave it up to the rest of you to do what you think is prudent for your machine and or systems.

Thanks
Wildman

 

I was just giving an example. Basically while not universally accepted it is generally accepted that just using an AV is no longer adequate.

 

Good Point.

 

Detecting rate over 90 % in without DOS & OtherOS in AV-Comparatives, advanced heuristics in AV-Comparatives, capability to upgrade program without uninstalling the former one (= auto upgrade), capability to detect adware and riskware, update frequency more than 250 times/year, excellent cleaning capability, capability to scan inside web links, trojan detection in AV-Comparatives at least 85 %, low costs to renewals, good unpacking skills. What more?

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Good measurements for picking a good AV imo.

 

Apart from all of us converting to KAV

I think if everyone would make his AV choice {any of the major commercial ones}; then religiously keep it up-to-date; maintain it and upgrade it when Vendor provides engine upgrades; etc. Supplement his AV with a good program to detect the Expanded Threats -- Ewido is an excellent choice for that {outstanding detection}; also get MSAS for free, or CounterSpy for oh, 20 bucks, and run a resident AntiSpyware protection; I think if folks would just take those basic measures, coupled with "sane surfing" {avoiding dangerous or risky sites} -- probably won't get infected 99.9% of the time.

ALSO, Everyone: Submit any undetected malware samples to your Vendor-of-Choice! Malware submissions enhance ALL our security!

 

Use Prevx, DesktopArmor or Safe'n'Sec (NOT all at once though) and all of those antispyware applications become fairly obsolete.

I've not had a spyware infection in nearly two years, and all I run is Safe'n'Sec and a AV product (DrWeb or VBA32).

I also browse exclusively with Firefox.

 

Very good advise Randy. Good to see you back here.

 

Sorry for overreacting. I just didn't appreciate my opinion being called rhetoric, my experience being called nonsense and being referred to as hysterical.

Everyone here has the right to an opinion. That opinion should not include personal insults.

I don't think you will find two users here who agree on every single point of computer security but you can learn a lot from others who have more experience. I have.