Free AV question

Thanks - great info

 

are you sure?

you do realise the 'Detection Effectiveness' are based on the pro versions,

avast free has the same detection has paid, whereas the other 2 do not.

 

I have been a long time AVG Free user.I used to install it to friends' machines too,mainly because it was so light and easy to configure.

Nowdays,though,i am afraid that i wouldn't trust it for anything else than the eicar test.Too many friends have been infected while using it,every time the latest definition wasn't enough to detect the malware.I had some similar cases myself.

So now i use Avira.

 

Hi Fuzz,
Since the paid version of AVG includes AVGAS, I am thinking that if one used a good AS application along with AVG free it would improve the detection rate.
I realize you might not want to pay for an AS application, but Spyware Terminator is free, I think, and SAS has a lifetime license that is reasonable.

Personally my favorite free AV is Avast, but I still use an AS application when I use Avast Home.

Best,
Jerry

 

Features does not protect, detection rate does.

 

avast free has a better detection than avira free.

avira does not have adware/spyware detection

avira only beat avast by about 2%, you realise this right?
and i believe more than 2% of the malware out there is spyware/adware, a hell of a lot more.

no email scanner, yes sure... some people will argue the fact that the real time monitor in avira will still catch it bla bla, but if it wasnt needed, all av's would not have one.

http scanner, again, there will be some arguments against it, but if it wasnt needed... some av's would not be including this in their product, or adding it to their product for the coming versions.

the loss of adware/spyware detections in avira free, really limits its detection rate, as 99% of people will always encounter spyware and adware before they ever reach a virus (and even then, only 2% difference on a massive 400,000+ set)

if i had to make a guess, i would put avira free at around the 90% mark, comparable to its 98-99% paid version.

its the paid version that is tested on av-comparatives, not the free versions of avg and avira.

whereas, avast free has the same detection rates as paid, you understand this right?

avira add the price-tag just for an email scanner (which apparently is not needed ... so lets leave that out) and the adware/spyware detection, so this is/must be a big part of its detection capabilities.

----------
on another note, detection rates do not protect either if the removal is poor.
----------

this is not really a bashing of avira, (less so for the paid version) but to state that avg and avira free versions, are clearly no match for avast, simple as that!

peace out, i think my argument is quite valid, even if there will be people that disagree for arguments-sake

at least we can hope the fanboys will keept this thread going *lol*

 

Do you have any links to reputable tests where avast free has been tested against avira free, or is this a personal oppinion?

I agree that this is a disadvantage, but I've noticed that avira's heuristics detect some spyware installers.

According to AV-comparatives Feb 07, it was not 2%, but 5% (or approx 23,000 samples)

An email scanner is a useful tool, but it is not essential, anything detected by an email scanner would also be detected by on-access scanner, but the email scanner gives the advantage of detecting at an earlier stage, but you're still just as safe with an on-access scanner.

There are arguments as to whether an HTTP scanner is necessary, some say yes, some no. Out of the one's I've used, personally I've found Avast's to be one of the best.

90% of what test bed?

Av-comparatives does not include any spyware/adware in it's test bed, so with regards to detection levels, the results on av-comparatives would be the same if the free versions were tested.

Londonbeat

 

it was a guesstimate of a test with virus/adware/spyware included.

as you rightly said, av-comparatives does not include that, so the results are purely based on virus detection.

5% difference, you are right, but for virus only, if you add adware/spyware detections into the test, im sure avast would out-shine avira free by some distance.

there are some malware threats that can only be caught by an http scanner, i remember some of the experts saying that on this very forum, something which avira does not have.

i think avira, like nod32 with VB100 use this purely has a marketing scheme.

nod has its poor unpacker support, and like nod32 and avira who use these tests as propaganda, they both have below-par removal in my experience.

98% detection
X- amount of VB100
X amount heuristic detection

they all look good on a products 'buy it now' page, for sure.

to end this rant, avast has a better feature set, correct?
and a better detection rate if adware/virus/spyware are in the test-sets right? (i know we have no test to show this, but i dont need one, and never have i needed to see a test to tell me if a productis good or not)

the pawns (chess) will lure themselfs into this, doing has they told by tests, and i dont blame the testing, but the marketing, so i understand why the companys do this, but it really is nothing short of propaganda, and i for one, aint fooled by it.

 

I don't agree that Avast free beats Avira free. Avira classifies many spyware samples as trojans and also picks up quite a bit with heuristics.

 

ask stefan just how much avira adds to its premium product for its detection

--------
but anyway, i shall leave this thread for you all to argue in

have fun

dont really know why ive posted my comments in it really, from the first 5 posts it seemed like spam to me.

 

Not necessarily. It's not that unlikely that an exploit appears (HTML, JavaScript, VBScript, GIF/JPG/whatever - how many of them were there already?) - that will execute the code directly in the memory of the vulnerable mail client (or web browser, speaking of HTML scanner), without writing it to disk first.

 

This thread was started to try and figure out which of the tools would be easier for a "novice" (that does not place security high on the list) to use. I found out the hard way that putting ZA free on my daughter's pc did nothing if she just kept clicking "allow" because what the hell is a server anyway?

It has since evolved into a debate on which tool is better at detection which is a been there done that road. There are posts all over the place for that.

 

I install and recommend Avast Home for novice users.
Use it myself also.Takes very little configuration,but you can tweak it some.

 

And what test do you run ?

For years I've run every gaming benchmark there is, on all types of systems, AV's do not slow down gaming. Maybe the AV's with HTTP scanners might have an effect on online gaming, but you would need a benchmark test to see this. There's to many 'other' variables in online gaming that would make it almost impossible to pin point slow downs on the AV.

LCD's vs CRT, CPU's, Memory, HD's, Video cards, internet connection type, determine game speed. Not what AV you use.....

I like and use Avast

 

This one:
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=168631

SourMilk out

 

I agree Jerry.I actually think that the ex-Ewido engine inside AVG Pro ,is the best part of it.Nowdays to people who ask me for free protection,i propose various combinations.Avast Free or Avira Free (depending on their personal taste) plus SuperAntispyware Free and AVG Antispyware on demand.Most kids seem to prefer Avast for the fancy skins,peer to peer guards etc,while older people,prefer the more "sober" AntiVir.I personally prefer Avira,despite the horrible update servers.I was kinda disappointed by payware antivirus in the past,a bit because in times they didn't protect me,a bit because i grew tired of slowing down my machine or having "features" i decided i didn't want ,that made me scrap my license (ADS streams in KAV5 for example).In my opinion,they are obsolete as concept.Yes,they are still invaluable for the average user,but they aren't real protection.It's more a russian roulette.No av can catch 100% of live malware and all you can do is PRAY that by the time you encounter it,the av company will have it in its signatures.This isn't very wise way to think of your security for me.

Nowdays,i just pick one of the free antivirus and just rely more on hips.No slowdowns,no money wasted.That's why for the more advanced friends i try to promote the idea of using HIPS or PowerShadow.The times i 've been caught off guard by malware,because AVG Free was "asleep",i was saved by HIPS flagging abnormal registry entries.

Regards!
Fuzzfas

 

OK guys one more quickie and then I'll gladly kill this thread myself. I'm down to Antivir and Avast!. Are false positives an issue with Antivir - I only remember getting a couple with Avast! And I do appreciate the help, I just don't have the time to do the testing I would like to do.

 

False postitives are with every antivirus, dang to tell you the truth I felt safe getting false positives (maybe one or two) with antivir and feels good clearing them up to see if was a real virus or not!

 

I use Avast Home and SuperAntispyware Pro and very happy with it. It may be old but check this out for a comparison: http://antivirus.about.com/od/antivirussoftwarereviews/a/freeav_2.htm . Also use Comodo firewall.

 

avast!

and I tested all three


and please select a SKIN on avast other than the strange appearing winamp thing.
They have lots of skins to download - I like the green vista appearing skin

.

 

Well, I gave them their machine back last night - I ended up putting Antivir on it though at the last minute I was really leaning toward Avast! I set the realtime scanner heuristics to low and the on demand scanner to medium and have it set to run a scan weekly.

I am trying to convince them to buy the paid version of Antivir since it would add the realtime spyware protection which is probably what they need more than the AV. Problem is they have only 256 MB memory, so with Antivir, AVG AS and ZA running, they are already eating into that.

I thank everyone for the suggestions, we will see how it goes.

 

I agree with you, I have never noticed an AV slowdown gaming, including online gaming. I have NOD32 with HTTP scanner running and play LoTR Online, Everquest, Planetside and others at various times and an HTTP scanner has no noticeable impact.