Avira 10 launched

Some of the Atoms have hyper-threading and SSE4, only a select few of Penryn duos had SSE4 and none hyper-threading. A atom 330+ION ITX outperforms a Penryn based duo laptop with a Nvidia 9xxx or 1xx chip. Also a desktop with IGPU.


Avira still does better than KIS and GDATA for me on any hardware. NOD32, Norton, McAfee etc have crapped out and failed on detection for me over the years. I have a serious problem with bloat-wear anyway, it indicates careless developers. Panda, Norman, Dr.Web are also good IMO.

 

Well I too agree in some cases coz I experience slow browsing for sometime and sometimes get the full speed

 

Does anyone know how this bit works? Where is the option to do an advanced check?

'taken from Avira website'

Avira AntiVir Version 10 users who join the Avira AntiVir ProActiv Community (the in-the-cloud component of ProActiv) benefit from even more protection, as members can automatically run an advanced check on suspicious files: those will be sent to Avira’s security experts for analysis and the results are then used to further refine the behaviour-based detection.

Cheers

Jlo31

 

tested done by languy99


http://www.youtube.com/user/languy99#p/u/1/nvXVSj_OeqE

 

That's interesting link.

I'm not a power user, but have some computing knowledge

Can anyone comment without dissing a particular AV. Is it specific against Avira or the type of AV protection in general?

I run superantispyware pro and if I have Avira or indeed any one of the the other competative products like Kaspersky, am I protected against these attacks?

(I have the common sense not to download when prompted and have browsers setup eg ie8 smart filtering)

 

yes, its very easy to infect a computer with Avira, kinda makes you laugh (at least me) when its supposed to be 99.9% virus-detection-effective, especially over a test that contains over 1 million threats, wow!

yet, when people take just handfuls of samples, computer becomes heavily infected.

& i dont relate to just this video, test and trial yourself.

this is why the tests they are in are useless, and why the software itselfs while not useless, is just not that great as people seem to think.

 

Before passing judgment note that any AV currently on the market with anal-retentive configuration is vulnerable to the same thing. Go wright a keylogger or hooking trojan in purebasic for example, it'll pass through every AV on the market unless someone else has done it and used it and cause signatures to be committed to vendors. Heuristics wouldn't pick it up because it has imports of a legit program and no malware signature. Sandboxes from what I've seen don't report most native api use patterns.

You could write malware that could go undetected for years if not forever if you didn't distribute it. Same applies to most cloud engines, I'm sure their is a PR friendly explanation for this, but it's simply reality. Malware is the same type of binary and uses the same API as legit software. Scripts/macros fall under the same reality except with some shell interfaces in VBA and Jscript where a single call throws flags.

 

Well, I'm not going to dump Antivir because some guy tested it in a ten minute video on You Tube and gave us a 30 second or less result. I would at least showed a detailed flowchart and an outside computer analyst on his/her opinion of my expert antivirus testing abilities.

Is there such a thing as a 100 percent perfect score on these tests? Why doesn't he use other methods to determine an infection other than Malwarebytes or Hitman Pro? Why does he have to announce to us that he has to pause the video again? How come he doesn't have a scale like our favorite PCMag tester, Neil Rubenking?

 

i didnt mean to post this as me being againest avira i posted that link for viewing perposes only, while i still do like avira.

 

I like the Avira suite.

Should I be using a sandbox in addition to it or an AV then? I didn't have much luck with Avira Av and commodo4 together before, and would prefer to keep the suite.

Maybe I'm answering my own question, I don't expose myself online and even when working in Russia, and needing to swap USB keys for file updates, which is like modern day Russian roulette, my AVs always protected me, although it became really annoying.

(the video guy is a moderator for commodo I note, but seems genuine contributor)
edit: going to try commodo on one machine as I like timemachine and why not, thought it was part of the av-comparatives group test, but it wasn't

 

No problems for me with Avira Premium and Comodo with D+,full speed and total harmony.
Off topic-be careful with that,CTM.2 times i uninstalled it,and every time it messed up my MBR and i was forced to make a full OS reinstall.And i'm not the only one.

 

thanks joe, yes I'd read that. Ive got a full backup without it, but I don't think Ill ever uninstall it (time machine)

I'll try and duplicate your Avira AV only + the comodo firewall then instead, and run it for a few days.

 

Well you can laugh, you've got nothing to earn or lose from Avira as you'r not using it. So what is the big deal about it? Some people seem to have a mission to warn other members against the Avira danger, perhaps that is the price to pay to be on top.

As far as I'm concerned I've used it for almost 3 years and it has never failed.

 

I had Avira 9 not in English: last thursday I uninstalled it, rebootted, I used the registry cleaner tool of Avira and then I cleaned my system also with my registry clenaer; I installed Avira 10, but it doesn't update.

Did someone experimented the same issue ? ( I restored a disk image with Avira 9 ).

 

Normally one doesn't need to uninstall, as the new version is upgraded as adding a new module to it. Maybe you'll have to wait some time to get Avira 10 in your language.

 

Ya, but my language version I have to wait next May... And anyway I have not problem with English sw, I don't remember why I installed Avira 9 not in English.

 

Im using version 10 now
without problems but
by the auto update you can check
start job while connecting to the internet (dial up)
i have a direct connection to the internet
do i check that option or uncheck?

Thanks!

 

Well, I did test it myself last night with a small sample of zero day malware links and it didn't do well at all. Both Avast and Kaspersky did much better, with KAV not letting a single thing in, so not sure what difference it really makes. You can have 10,000 links or 20 links and if your system gets infected, it gets infected. IMO Avira 10 doesn't perform any better than 9 did. Not in my tests anyway.

 

thanks, its the 'norm' for me to see computers protected *cough cough* by Avira to be heavily infected with just a handful of 'random' samples,

worries me that people actually believe its 99.99% detection rate over a 1 million+ sample set.

and i, like you - see others doing better with the same random samples many many times.

the sad thing is, people believe these tests and choose to believe what they wish.

I understand you do some small tests for people on newer samples, i kinda do the same but check my samples prior to testing with some registry snapshot-type programs to see their changes and validate them just for my own enjoyment, i dont publish my results like you do, unless its for Prevx in the Prevx section of the forum, as i like to play around with the software im using myself.

but it shocks me to believe what people actually believe on this forum at times, i guess your the same?

 

Well, I am 54 and still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. The truth is in the believing.

 

didnt us brits introduce sarcasm?

still leads to the fact that you actually DONT believe such things.

 

I'm not sure the point you are trying to make. Seems you are posting on one side and then reverting to another. Are you saying the small sample tests are something not to believe in or the larger sample tests? Guess I'm just a little confused by your comments. Please explain.

 

actually I do believe in all these tests. Some more then others. If malware changes on a consistent basis, then would it not be true also on how well one detects or not.

I dont really think any AV catches anywhere near 90 percent of zero day malware. But I still think it is still the one most useful tool to assist you. A sandbox or backup program would be number 2.

Avira is very good, basically we quibble over pennies on all these products. Is it become that cut-throat?. You could put a blindfold on and pick one product from this site and be totally satisfied.

 

Lol no, think you just misunderstood my last comment, was trying to say that you also don't believe what loads do that avira has 99.9% detection or is the best at detections, based on your own testings,

 

I got Avira working with Comodo firewall fine, probably the only issue before was me with the flu. I'll see how things go. Judging by everyones' sigs and the whats your security like thread, there really are a lot of ways to skin a cat

Apologies if I derailed the thread a bit.

Seems to be a gap between what people perceive/test the new Avira 10 performance. I'll follow the thread through the month. Interesting to see how this pans out.