Security Suites vs Stand Alone Programs

I tried security suites, Avira, Bullguard, ZoneAlarm, Trend Micro, etc. I've come to the conclusion that I like stand alone apps better. Things just seem easier to get to. If you want to check something in your firewall, just a couple of clicks and you're there. Same with a stand alone AV. I also found most suites, with the exception of a couple, to be heavier than stand alone apps. I'm running KAV 6 and Sunbelt Kerio 4, and my computer is humming along nicely. Just my two cents. Take it for what it's worth.

 

I had alway thought the same but KIS is very good. I have it on my MCE sys, it is light and solid

 

That is called referrer logging, can be turned off on Opera browser, and I'd imagine also in Firefox.

 

Hello,
I prefer stand-alone applications.
Mrk

 

The layered security approach has been popular at this security forum for as long as I've been here.

That makes my point about choice.

Security over Speed for me.Any day.

Lavasoft AdAware?
There are way better free choices.And F-Secure BlackLight is currently available for free?

Try a little over half that here.23mb.

That's an opinion I won't agree with.I'd never use AVG antivirus.

Take the time to update multiple programs vs. "put all your eggs in one basket." That's an obvious,easy choice IMO.We aren't talking an eon in time here btw.Having nothing to do all the time?That's a rather juvenile statement.

 

Besides, many softwares update completely automatically, or can be configured to do so.

If you run just ONE program on your computer it may or may not be enough. I don't believe in running 50 different apps to make sure to cover EVERY possible malware, but I do believe in knowing that sometimes one product can fail. And with nothing else to back it up you may get infected.

 

Tradetime,
Thanks for that I just knew it as referrals I use both Firefox and Internet Explorer but by firewall adjustment on Zone Alarm Pro I stopped them so presumably I should be able to do likewise in Bullguard IS 7.0 IF Outpost the pro version which pcflank claim as the most secure the only to pass all leak tests never mind referrals!

 

I have always used an antivirus and a adware/spyware program in the past, plus a firewall. Now that most av's also detect adware/spyware and other types of malware, the use of multiple security applications are redundant. If I were to use any type of suite now, it would be the new AVG Anti-Malware or Internet Security Suite. I have used AVG products in the past and have always liked them. I currently use a stand alone product, Dr.Web Antivirus with the XP firewall. In my opinion, some people go way overboard securing their computers and become a slave to computer security applications. Spending the majority of their time updating, upgrading and scanning their system, acknowledging security pop ups and dealing with various compatability issues. This is not for me, I prefer performance with minimal impact from security applications.

 

Hi Tester, what is your dislike of AVG antivirus? Have used it for a while now on one of my computers and always thought as free av goes it wasn't bad.

 

I prefer stand-alone products too, but can see many users prefer the ease of installing just one suite for many 'normal' users of Windows. Of course with firewalls with pre-created rules, one has to rely that the vendor has undertaken thorough research.

 

I like AntiVir and Avast much better.

 

Also AVG has the lowest detection of the free avs. So when you say "as free av goes its not bad", you're incorrect. It's the WORST of them.

 

According to what?

If you just count those new samples in Av-Comparatives.org 08-2006 test added after the Av-Comparatives.org test 02-2006, you can see that AVG beated Avast, McAfee, Norman, BitDefender, DrWeb, F-Prot.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

for av-comparatives, i usually go by the ratings (standard, advanced, etc).

 

Depending on where you read, there tends to be little to choose between them imho, but then I'm no expert on the subject. I use both Avast and AVG on different machines for the last couple of years after dumping Norton, and they both seem to suit my purposes. I supplement with regular online scans at Kaspersky and Trend.
In answer to the original theme of the thread, I prefer standalone applications.

 

Generally speaking single sw is much more settable than the suite one. I.e. BullGuard has BitDefender AV, and Outpost FWL, but both of them can be setted only partly instead of BitDefender AV and Outpost Stand-alone. The same for ZoneAlarm ISS. AV has very simple setting items.

So, at the moment, I'm using custom Suites on my PCs. But I hope in the near future there will be Suites much more settable the nowadays ones.

But is only my opinion.

Best Regards.
Mike

 

I'm just trying ZIS 6. Simply great. Much more settable then others suite.

Mike

 

ZIS? u mean zonealarm?

im waiting for the version 7. then it will be a decent firewall with excellent AV (KAV). currently it uses etrust av which i find less than stellar.

 

Hi WSFuser.

ZIS = ZoneAlarm Internet Security.
I'm testing 7.0 Closed Beta. It seems it works fine.
I'm trying KIS 6.0. I like it too. Very nice GUI. No slowing down.

On my PC I'm using ZA Pro and BD 10 AV. But ZA slow down my PC.
I hope 7.0 official release will be speedyest than actual 6.5.

Unfortunately I cannot say anything else regarding ZA 7.0 'cause "Closed beta" are classified.

Best Regards.
Mike

 

Several people have mentioned Comodo...please read the posts in their forum about deletion of registry entries and certain .dll files at random by Comodo. This happened to me and it isn't any fun at all. If I had read the posts of these kind of problems I never would have installed it to begin with. Beware...just a word to the wise...

 

Are you referring to Comodo Antivirus?The forum seems to have a lot of threads about "bugs" in the AV section.
A lot of Comodo firewall users here.Not many Comodo Antivirus that I know of.

 

I am coming to the conclusion stand alone progs better I have replaced Bullguard IS 7.0 with my previously registered zone alarm pro and bitdefender av 10 as stand alones much more configurable and I have been able to set za to pass all the tests on pcflank bar leak tests which I havent tried yet.
If pro outpost in bullguard suite such configuration shouldn't have been a problem.

 

Switching from Bullguard (Bitdefender, Outpost) to a BD 10 stand-alone is great. It' s highly configurable and low on memory consumption.
A better way to use a suite is to use one that has all the modules from the same developer. This is not always the best solution because it is clear that on certain suites av or firewall or something else is weaker than another piece of software. I think we should use these suites because they'll get better as we use them, it's almost natural for a product not to evolve when there are no users to test it and send some feed-back to the developers.

 

...says the bitdefender support guy

 

Has anyone said I ain't ?? Check some other posts and see that I also speak about other software and other companies, if their product has stronger parts then BitDefender it has, I'm not saying they don't.

Oh, and we we're talking about Security Suites, and BitDefenderIS is one of them.