NAV Or PC-cillin?

Hi. I'm running NAV 2003 right now but I'm thinking about going with another AV. I've trialed a few, McAfee, e-trust, and PC-cilling. Of those three, I like PCC.

How would you compare PCC to NAV? I'm talking strictly security wise. I'm not concerned about which one uses more resourse. I'm only concerned about protecting my computer. NAV has done a good job, as far as I know there are no nasties on my computer. I don't like the fact that NAV only updates it's virus definitions once a week unless you use the Intelligent Update. To me, that is a hassle. JMHO. All the major AV's update every day. I can't understand why Symantec won't.

Would I be losing/gaining by switching to PCC?

 

hi
consider trialing a bit more, as there are alot of av's these days. reading this forum you'll find LOTS of threads related to the pros and cons of each av... trial at least nod 32, rav and panda. but usually when you want the best possible protection the unanymous decision is kaspersky antivirus, or products utilizing the KAV engine, like f-secure and avk

 

but back to your original question ... i would choose nav..

 

between nav or pc-cillin ??
Ans: NONE

 

I use PCC 2002 on my main box, and like it pretty well.

*It's very easy to use, and the 2003 version has improved it's firewall (though I don't recommend it's use unless it's a pinch) You have the option to not install the firewall when you set up PCC. There is also a website blocker function, which in my view is worthless, so I don't bother with it.

*Interface is much improved, and is very easy to use. Trend is usually one of the first av's to have definitions out for new bugs.

*Updates are, on average, about twice a week, and in 2003, the update feature has been totally automated--ie: set it to get the update, and it will without intervention. They are usually (estimating) around 500k or less. PCC 2002 required you to choose whether to fetch the update immediately, which I personally find a bit annoying.

*Individual files are right-click scannable. My 3.5 gigs of data scans in about 6 minutes. Scans can be scheduled, and always go off without a hitch here.

*Haven't had a virus using PCC, and have used NOD32, GAV, and NAV as backups on a trial basis.

I will probably renew PCC on this box when the license expires, simply because I haven't had a single problem with it--and that's a good thing--although the "curious" side of me wants to try something new.

Regarding NAV: It's a great av. It's not as resource-hungry as it's urban legend would have you believe, however, it IS very invasive upon install, and it's hard to remove completely, although that has been improved also.

The interface is easy, and although some posters complain about it's mail scanning ability, I have never had a problem, and think it's an excellent av also.

Frankly, I regard them both as a tossup. I like PCC's ease of use, though, and will probably stick with it for now, as it's continuing to improve.

HTH

 

Here's another...

 

Thanks for your help illukka and JimIT.

Another one of my reasons for thinking of changing AV's is the "unpacking" thing that seems to be the big thing now. I guess NAV is not a very good unpacker. I don't know if I should be so concerned about that or not. But everybody is talking about it and I thought it might be a good thing to have.

illukka, is the avk you mentioned extendia avk pro? That's the only thing I could find with a google search. No trial version offered at their site.

 

Yes, AVK is the extendia package.

But AVK is only a relabeled product, the original version is "AntiVirenKit" by the German company G DATA Software. And they have an english trial on their antiviruslab.com server. The link is:

http://www.antiviruslab.com/e_download.php?lang=gb

Regards,

Karl

 

NAV is the most used antivirus in the world. Virus writers know that so in many cases they test their viruses with NAV. That's why I think NAV is not such a good choice.And besides, PcCillin has a better trojan detection.

 

I think I'm going to go with PC-cillin. I liked what I saw in the trial version. I like that it does daily virus updates. And I like what vrf said about it detecting more trojans than NAV.

Also I found that I can purchase it at buy.com for $29.99 less a $25.00 rebate. That's seems too good to pass up.

I tried downloading the trial version of AVK from the link provided here, but it was in German. Didn't understand a word.

 

Hate to bug you guys again, but I have one more question. How does PC-cillin rate as far as unpacking? Is unpacking something I should seriously take into concideration?

 

To Hobnob from Firefighter!

You can look at the unpacking skills from here!

http://www.rokop-security.de/main/article.php?sid=494

I think there are plenty of better alternatives in there!

By the way, totally free Avast 4 Home has the result in the Rokop test 11 unpackers, when that Avast 3 version in that test has only 10!


"The truth is out there, but it hurts!"

Best Regards,
Firefighter!

 

Unpacking is most important with regards to trojan/backdoor detection.

If you want _one_ AV programm, which can cope with all kinds of malware (including trojans), it should have good unpacking capabilities. But if you consider using a dedicated anti-trojan app with good memory scan, you can live with a non-unpacking AV.

PC-Cillin has almost no unpack capabilities... comparable to NAV...

Imho, AVK (or extendia or whatever) would be a better choice...

 

Wow! I'm going to hold off on purchasing PC-cillin for now. I need to do some more thinking on this and check out some more AVs. Decisions, decisions.

 

I agree with anvil here. I use a dedicated anti-trojan, and if you download like a madman, a good AT would be something to consider alongside PCC. If you're on broadband, I'd definitely have a good AT in there.

Agreed.

And as anvil mentioned, AVK (and KAV Lite) are good alternatives--having the KAV engine included. PCC's not a slouch av, though.

 

they say NAV is a trojan coders best friend; a server doesn't take much modifying to elude and slip pass NAVs detection. Let's just say Norton is not considered in the advance category among avs in trojan development circles.

 

one difference between nav and pc-cillin springs to mind.. Support!!
nav support is zilch, it sucks to say the least, whereas with trend micro the support is very good, at least here in finland..

 

about trojans, norton has been adding vast amounts of trojan signatures lately.. the lack of unpackers mean that they will have to make another sig for each packed variant, but they are doing it.

 

Hello Hobnob...

I am with JimIT here. I've used PC-Cillin as my primary AV for my previous 3 systems. The ONLY time I ever had trouble was with a new engine update once [18 months ago], but I tried again a couple of days later it it went smooth.

Versions used were 2000, 2002, and now 2003. 2003 is by far the best yet.

It's: Fast; Updates regularly [sometimes twice a day when really bad nasties are found]; VERY EASY to use, the GUI is self explanatory. I have tested several over the course, but always found PCC [for ME] was the best way to go.

I have never had an infection at all [apart from the usual "nuisance" malware which AdAware and SpybotS&D removes anyway] since I've had PCC, but I use a well defined "layered" approach to security.

An AV ALONE does not make for 'top' security. You need other programs to cover all bases.

Some Points:

1: First, you MUST distinguish between Virus/Trojan.

All the AV's out there have a PRIMARY function of detecting viruses. That's been their main aim since Uncle Bill gave us Windows.

Even though some AV's have a very good detection rate of Trojans, it is extremely wise to get a dedicated Anti-Trojan program as well.

No matter HOW GOOD "your" AV may be, it will NEVER detect all possible infections. That's just plain fact. So an AT like TDS3 [which I use] from Diamond Computer Systems or Trojan Hunter [heard it is good, have not tried it] would be the way to go.

2: Someone mentioned that Unpackers are not good in PCC. Correct, but for a Trojan to execute, it must first be unpacked anyway. Although I would personally prefer them to be detected and wiped out straight up. BUT that's what the AT's come in handy for.

3: I used GAV [now discontinued] as a back-up and it's unpacking abilities were second to none. We used to download Test files from Gladiator [GAV] to test it's abilities with.

I used to do a scan with GAV but left PCC and Real Time Monitor running, and when GAV reached the folder and unpacked a trojan [these were real, but had been slightly modified so not to cause harm], PCC's RTM was the FIRST to jump all over the file. It grabbed it and quarantined it very quickly, so therefore I was pleased with PCC's performance.

Only you can be the best "guide" as to what program you eventually decide on. You have already stated you used and liked PCC for its ease, etc. so in part that's half the battle. You've used it, you liked it and regardless of which AV you pick, it will not detect 100% ALL of the time. But I will settle for 99% + a good AT.

4: Support. Well, that's a no brainer. Trend has been recognised as a great team for support. NAV users of course will also atest to it's support regime, but the number of complaints I have seen in a lot of forums leaves me gobsmacked with some of the stories. I only read a post 10 minutes ago complaining about it. However, this is in NO WAY meant to start a flaming war. Just from what I have seen. I have not seen 1 single post referring to Trend's lack of support yet, not to say they aren't out there, but not to my knowledge.

5: Go with your "gut" feeling. That's it. A lot of people have an 'instinct' and act on it. If you "feel" something is really right, go for it.

Best of luck mate.
Cheers, TAS.

 

tassie, you took the words from my mouth..
any top av will protect your pc well, be pc-cillin or nav or nod or anything. and for the price of KAV personal pro( the ultimate av)you can get pc-cillin and trojan hunter and be as well protected..
if you encounter any problems with pc-cillin, you will be helped by their support.. trying to get nav support is another story... spoken with broken english... best nav support for me has been other users at different forums
i have used both, seems i have at least trialled all av's out there.. if you find any new let me know

 

Hi Illukka.

LOL, well mate I do know of another new one, it's called "SBI" [Still Being Invented].... sorry, tongue in cheek.....but you are right, third party support is lousy at the best. Each person though, has to find their own comfort zone and work within that, as trying to use a product that they have trouble with, then get frustrated and annoyed with, will in the end cause distress and no matter how simple the "fix" may have been, it won't do the end user any good, they will simply switch.

Cheers, TAS

 

@Tassie_Devils

Yes, but as we are talking about runtime-packers and cypters, the packed trojan is unpacked in RAM - and since PCC has no memory scanner, it will definitely not detect a packed trojan at _any_ state.
Neither before it executes, nor after the execution.

'Real' memory scanners are very rare, btw... although some AVs pretend to have one...

 

it will detect if it has a signature for the packed trojan, like norton.. but each packed variant be it aspacked pecompressed or upx packed or anything needs a different signature.. but if the sigs are ok it_will_be_detected

 

Yes, you are right... every AV has signatures of packed malware, so PCC and Norton will detect _a few_ packed trojans, too.

But of course, it is impossible to add as much 'packed' signatures as an unpacking engine would cover.
You can only detect a _minimal_ ammount of packed trojans by signatures compared to the _possible_ ammount of packed variants... that's why it's definitely no satisfactory solution...