Taking into account that Zemana uses these engines/definitions in cloud AVG (Avast) Avira Bitdefender Kaspersky Eset Zemana Which AV would you use to run together with Zemana? I have been looking at Panda and Fortinet AV but I haven't seen much feedback specially about the last one. Qhioo 360 total security but I have my doubts about the privacy/spying issues taking into account the background of this company. The Fsecure could be nice and free by participating in the beta. Any feedback is welcome
if you want to use f-secure make sure you install zemana AFTER the install of f-secure. reason for this that it states that it has compatibillity issues with zemana and will uninstall it after the innitial setup and security scan. I am running CIS alonside with no problems
Not better add some HIPS & Virtualization/Sandbox layer than slow down pc by tons of av egines which together even can't catch all wirus whole world.... Behaviors blockers and av since copule years are weak to protect you against top virus infection.. But its your pc do what you want...
A similar question has already be asked, by myself. The answers are still valid. https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/zam-premium-which-free-antivirus-to-combine-with.385009/ There are options in the pipeline, like ZAM-Ultimate and new HMP.A, with real time protection.... Depending on my own tests, I will recommend Windows-Defender(with pup.reg) and one of these. With Unchecky in addition, most needs are covered.
I don't like the hips or sandbox approach I find it useless If I want to run something I will run it so hips, sandbox won't protect me. The only thing that could fit is VS on autopilot. I also use MBAE which I find indispensable
Well, nothing will protect you, if you allow it to run But if you run it in a sandbox, you can see what it's doing on a virtual system, so no harm will be done in the real system
That's is hardly true most malware won't have a interface or it wont tell you what will do. It usually won't do anything because it won't work in the sandbox. I have sandboxie to use it on demand but the approach of sanboxing all unknown files is stupid and a waste of time, you spend most time disabling the sanboxing and whitelisting things manually to allow legit software and installers to run properly
This is the truth about hips https://www.wilderssecurity.com/thr...-to-viable-hips-software-availability.392576/ And this is why I don't believe in them, when I download or execute something I already have done an analysis and taken a decision that I want to run a file, I don't need a useless pop-up or and autosandboxing feature that will make the purpose of running the app useless (nothing is saved) or it won't work or it will crash....
I agree, the downside of any sandbox approach is the false positive rate (and therefore the need of manual whitelisting). But I think you'll have the same issue with VooDooShield. You need to find a balance between security and usability and that balance depends on you and on how you use your PC. For example, I have a set of apps that I use and I seldom install something new, so the false positive rate will be nearly zero once I have set my whitelist. But of course, if you like to try new apps (especially if they are not widely used), you can have a big headache
I tried the pup.reg file in Creators Update and it didnt work, you need to use PowerShell to activate.
https://malwaretips.com/threads/enable-adware-protection-in-windows-defender.53574/ https://www.techsupportall.com/enable-pua-protection-to-block-adware-in-windows-defender/
Well, Zemana is using about 57mb right now, so that's just false. However, I wouldn't recommend McAfee to anyone for anything, but that's just me.
I guess we don't need a ZAM Thread because all it does is run good and does its job, so we won't have much to say about it...
