It is no secret that all AV companies data collect (More so than others), or even have to in some areas in order to properly diagnose threats. What AV companies do you trust the most, when it comes to their data collecting technique's? Poll is multiple choice, so you can vote more than once.
I apologize for not paying enough attention, to change 360 Total Security to 360, Adaware to Lavasoft and ZoneAlarm to Check Point.
I am kind of on the fence about this subject. As I do like testing a bunch of them, I am not too sure if I trust a whole lot of them. What is your take?
I voted I trust none of them. I don't know what data they are collecting and how they sanitize and anonymize it. I don't think that they are collecting that data to make money, though. They are just following the trend in IT, which is "Collect all data you can".
Well, I have decided to go with an AV-Less setup. I'll still test them, but will not run one in real-time anymore. Too much data gathering for my liking.
None of them. I have no idea what what happens to the data once it leaves the confines of my system. Especially when it comes to $$$.
Lol, inb4 flamewar let us all enjoy this peaceful moment which wouldn't last for more than one day. Seriously though, considering the privacy law I wonder what would those Germany-based AVs would say. The least intrusive ones (according to that MUO article which concludes AV Comparative's data transmission report) are from South Korea and Austria. Also, to those who voted "None" but at the same time also voted for one or more AVs, what does that mean? I'm confused. @_@
I also trust none of them, so that´s why I ain´t using them. And I especially try to stay away from "Cloud AV´s".
If you don't trust them, don't install them, deceitful data collection could be done through the update channel not just the cloud... But I tend to think for well known company names, it would be too dangerous to do so, if caught, the Internet, Facebook, twitter would ruin their reputation within weeks...
@ Osaban Yeah, especially "Cloud AV" is scary, you don´t know when or what data is being transferred to their servers, it´s a bad idea if you ask me.
If I were to install a particular AV (or any other program for that matter) , I might as well assume that it has the means to leak data (even if it is unintentional; be it through technical implementation flaws or simply privacy laws pressure on the vendors). In other words, I don't "trust" my data not being collected/transmitted but I have decided the risk is worth the trade-off. Given that logic, I would put a slightly higher preference for a vendor/developer whose product provides me with the option not to send data (be it for sharing samples or simple error reports). The idea is that it gives the end-user a degree of control over the choice of none at all.
Give trust and you will be betrayed, that is the natural law of humanity. You could never rely upon a system with a management for privacy and anonymity.
On the other hand to assume that everybody around you is in the process of deceiving you given an opportunity, will poison your existence forever. Not worth it. I also believe that humanity by and large is a benign community...
We have several members that use or have used "360" IS or TS. But no one have voted for them. And several of the members that voted "I trust none of them" do actually use AV's, and some have even voted for a vendor in the list as well. I trust none of them(vote)...but I trust this vendor(vote). "do you trust your AV and vendor?" "no" "so you use it anyway?" "yeah baby" It doesn't make any sense when people chose to use products from vendors that they don't trust. It's just weird.
Right, well if I wouldn't trust Chrome then I wouldn't use it. But in Chrome's case I don't use it because I don't like it. It would give a funny feeling if I used products that I don't trust.
Oh believe me, humans are all malign, that's their basic nature. It won't be too hard to imagine some of these AV vendors are selling your data to 3rd party hands.