Which Do You Think Offers the Better Security, All in one or separate Applications?.

I was just very curious on this, and wanted to know the general security experts general consensus on this.

But what do you think offers the best, easiest to manage and most importantly safest security setup.

Either All in one setups (Such as Kaspersky IS 6, Norton IS, Online Armor+Antivirus and Firewall etc).

Or

Separate applications from different makers for each purpose. (Such as One application for firewall, another separate Antivirus. EG. Kaspersky AV, Zonealarm Firewall, Adaware Spyware etc.)

Or separate applications but from the same software maker, (Such as for example Kaspersky Antivirus Personal 5 and Kaspersky Antihacker etc, or Mcafee Enterprise AV and Mcafee Desktop Firewall etc).

I know resources wise it may be best to have one main application for everything. But it also on my thinking about it worries me, that if this one application gets corrupted or out thwarted by a specific malware that is your whole system in potential danger.

It is also, because i have been recently offered free one year contracts all at the same time to two separate Antiviruses, and Two separate free All in one suites. (One from my new univeristy, one from my new college, suprisingly one from my online banking, and one from my ISP broadband provider)

The one that is tempting me is F-Secure IS that my new Broadband ISP have offered me. But i was wanting to make sure it was the best way forward. Especially when my Kaspersky 5 Personal Key is still valid from my last University degree.

So which type of Antivirus, Firewall security setup do you think is the safest route to go down out of these three options?

Thanks
Anthony

 

Re: Which Do You Think Offers the Better Security, All in one or separate Application

Ya can't beat FREE. Test them all to see which combo works best for your particular rig.

 

Re: Which Do You Think Offers the Better Security, All in one or separate Application

That's a hard one. There is a case for using solid, dependable applications separately, but some all-in-one solutions are proving their worth, like KIS for instance. NOD32's new IS sounds to be promising as well. The suites by established players should work well in theory as they are using the same codebase as their standalone versions - the problems lie in how well they sit on someone's machine.

 

Re: Which Do You Think Offers the Better Security, All in one or separate Application

As you have the ability to get them for free ... try them out and take the one that suits you best.

Personally I prefer different components from different vendors - I just don't like to put my eggs in one basket - even though it isn't cost effective. ( I voted thusly)

 

Re: Which Do You Think Offers the Better Security, All in one or separate Application

Yes but it is also a general curioisity i have. Whether the security pro's believe all in one setups. While its obvious advantages on system resources and the ease of everything being all on the one GUI.

But also offer potential drawbacks of, if one aspect of the AIO application is defeated. Then the whole App is thrawted and thus potentially useless to stop that attack.

It is always something that has made me curious. And as i now have two free year licences to give two a go. I was just wanting to get peoples opinions of these all in one setups.

But you are right it may be worth testing on one of my multiboot OS that havent been fully setup yet.

Thanks
Anthony

 

I think there might be no answer to this question, because of the nature of the security software out there.

Security software can be one of the following nature:

anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewall, anti-trojan, process and registry monitoring, etc...

But today's security software usually have more than one functionality in a package, eg. AV+AS, AS+AT, AV+process+registry monitoring, AV+Firewall, or Firewall+AS, or AV+AS+Firewall, etc. When you used these separate packages all together, there is a certain degree of overlap and this cause conflicts, malfuction, hangs or even BSOD. If you want to have them working harmony in the same box, you may have to give up something, for example, to disable the AS function in an AV+AS package, or to disable the AS function in the firewall+AS package in order to have a your favorite AS standalone program function properly. This is one of the problem.

Second, there are not much choice for standalone products for AV, AS, AT, firewall, etc (e.g. LnS, F-PROT, etc). Even if you are can find standalone products for all of AV, AS, AT, firewall, process and registry monitoring, etc, running all of them in the background may trigger a very high resources utilization, leaving little resources for your other applications, unless all of the standalone packages are very light.

Third, to have an excellent All-in-one package, you need to have good expertise in all areas. And making all your different security components (anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewall, anti-trojan, process and registry monitoring, etc...) working flawlessly with each other in the package with minimum bugs requires a lot of testing and debugging. In order to make a certain most wanted feature to work, you may sometimes need to give up another useful feature in the package in order to avoid conflict. Therefore, having an all-in-one dream security software to work flawlessly is not that easy.

 

It's never accurate to provide a generic answer to such a question... It all depends on the specific apps you are comparing.

Re your interest in F-Secure IS, I'm currently using its 'big brother' (FSAVCS), but having used FSIS, I can tell you there isn't that much difference - both are excellent security suites... Go for it!

PS... By switching to F-Secure you won't really be losing KAV because both F-Secure suites mentioned above use 4-scanning engines, one of which is KAV.

 

Re: Which Do You Think Offers the Better Security, All in one or separate Application

It is very difficult for a Pro to predict how THOSE security applications will interact with YOUR rig. Why? Because those applications run IN WINDOWS, and therefore, they must interact with other programs and configurations that are specific with your PC.

In general, an All-In-One solution should provide adequate protection with the least compatiblity issue. Heck, I only have a hardware and software firewall and I'm still batting 1.000.

 

There was a time I wanted an all-in-one security software, but the security industry create security suites instead :
1. Firewall + AntiVirus + AntiSpyware OR
2. Firewall + AntiSpyware OR
3. Firewall + AntiVirus.
Some parts are better than the other and some parts are missing.
That wasn't my original idea of an all-in-one security software.

So I better use :
1. Firewall
2. AntiVirus
3. AntiSpyware
4. AntiTrojan
5. AntiKeylogger
6. ...

 

Six months ago I probably would have voted for seperate apps. But I have tried several security suites and I believe I actually prefer them now. I won't say that all suites are the same but if you tried a few you might be surprised. I am presently useing panda Titanium with antispyware firewall and several other modules and it works super. I do prefer the suites now.

 

i prefer having apps from separate vendors because it gives me flexibility. i can choose the kind of firewall i want and i can get the AV that works best with my comp.

as for separate apps from the same company, that is almost just like getting a suite.

until eset releases their security suite and uintil kaspersky's anti-hacker becomes more refined, i have yet to find a suite i like. usually its a good AV with so-so firewall and even lesser anti-spyware.

theres also teh issue of resources and for that, specialized programs are sometimes better.

 

Yes but do you enable all modules on the suites you test? Don't you think a thorough investigation of a suites capabilities would require it?

 

In general, separate components are the more secure option. If all else is equal, combined suites often share files or components which can result in a common vulnerability for all the components. With separate applications, you can choose the best (or best for you and your system) for each component. While security suites perform all the security related tasks, they seldom excel at any of them.
Suites generally use more disk space and system resources, cost more, but are easier to set up.
Separate components are more efficient with disk space and resources, but require more skill and knowlege to choose and configure components that give complete coverage. A very strong security package can be made from available freeware.
The question you need to ask is which is right for you. While separate components can cost little or nothing, they will cost you in the time it takes to choose and configure the components. Your level of skill and available time will decide which is best. If you understand how operating system components work and interact, how the internet works in regards to protocols, ports, IP addresses, etc, single purpose rule based security apps would be good choices. If you're not familiar with how the operating system and the internet actually function, a suite would be the better choice.
The core of my security package is Kerio 2.1.5 firewall, System Safety Monitor, and Proxomitron, all highly configurable rule based programs, a nearly bulletproof combination when configured properly. I use AntiVir as my AV.
While security apps have to be compatible with your operating system and installed software as well as with each other, more than anything else it needs to be compatible with you and your ability to configure it. In several threads in this forum, there are screenshots of Kerio 2.1.5 firewall rules. Take a look at them. If you understand what you see on them and why the rules work, go with rule based apps. If they look more complicated than you want to deal with, go with a suite or use an application based firewall like Zone Alarm, which is much simpler to set up and add the AV of your choice.
Rick

 

My first security application was Symantec NIS 2004. Whenever something was not right the whole suite was compromised and a reinstallation of NIS was often needed (anybody who had to deal with NIS 2004 might be aware that uninstalling and reinstalling it wasn't always easy).

Suites are becoming more and more reliable and light. I still prefer the separate approach from different vendors, IMO it is safer and easier to troubleshoot.

 

Re: Which Do You Think Offers the Better Security, All in one or separate Application

Seperate. Build your own best of breed which can change over time.

Conflicts are a concern. One security app. just not wanting to share the same PC can be a problem, but I find it rare, but more common as app. versions update. Even these issues are usually quickly dealt with by the various vendors.

Finally, some excellent fine points made by the Herblist in the above posting.

 

I am unwilling to rely on one vendor for a security suite.
As long as there aren't any software conflicts I prefer plugging in seperate components.It's better for me in my opinion.

 

I voted "All in one application setups". I'm not a fan of free software or multiple security applications. That's just me...

 

nod32 and windows firewall are separate apps with specialized functions, are they not? i dont see any suites in ur setup.

 

Not using a suite at this time, will try NOD32's suite when it is made available. I prefer suites. At the moment, I use the Windows Firewall with NOD32.

Marc

 

as usual and more logic:

all software makers has different specialty


infoseeker

 

Re: Which Do You Think Offers the Better Security, All in one or separate Application

dont usually do polls but this one caught my eye...

voted: separate and different.

plus what herbalists post said totally


one thing herbalist said...:

 

Separate...
NAT from my firewall (usually a router) to hide my network
Antivirus/Antithreat....NOD32

Although..for a layered approach...I'm getting quite interested in one sort of "UTM Appliance"...some flavors of Linux routers which run unified threat management...combine NAT, very deep SPI, intrusion detection, antivirus, antispam, antiphishing, antimalware, and robust content filtering options...all scanned at the gateway using transparent proxy.

Not to replace antivirus at your machine..but it's a nice way of adding another layer of protection for your network...without bogging down your PC(s) with tons of other applications.

What I've tried so far..is the "Copfilter" addon module for IPCop, and my current favorite...Endian.

 

Variety is a virtue that best distributes a more sound and secure overall total coverage along with stability and satisfaction.

Suites are designed to encompass a whole host of coverages but seldom if never without recurring issues or lacking in one area or another when a new intruder design is released thru the web lines that effectively can disable the entire combo.

Stay smart and sharp and choose widely from better choices.

 

Re: Which Do You Think Offers the Better Security, All in one or separate Application

I would prefer a separate individual application, so that if one failed or terminated or "eaten by monster" still others has the capability to protect and do their work. Also, a combinations of free and paid programs performs more better, but it is just my opinion.

 

I find myself floating away from these huge all-in-one solutions, each update gets larger too.
It feels to me like building a huge safe around my house, as opposed to installing reasonable locks.
I tend to look for 'the minimum set of required features for sufficient safety'.