Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by PaulBB, Jun 11, 2013.
~Links removed per Policy~
Personally I haven't noticed any drop in performance so far. I usually do notice quite a big impact in performance, at least occasionally with antivirus software - even software such as BitDefender and WSA which many posters here find to be very light.
However, I've only had it installed for a few days, so not a lot of time using yet, and time will tell how it fares.
For those experiencing performance issues, changing the protection level from Medium to Low, should help.
Well Easter bit the bullet and after a system REFRESH installed and updated everything. My bitdefender update went pretty fast compared to others who complained it was slow.
All in all it seems reasonably ok. Like the cloud combo. Also like that you can restore original files if need be and not have an AV crush a good file via FP.
It's paper lite here with only the slight performance inconvenience that's typical for all AV's that have to disassemble every file for match ups purposes. AFAIK it makes a good on-demand AV without all the complex nonsense i grown to detest of AV's. That's exactly why on XP i realized far better security with classical (or noisy) HIPS!
Once well configured a HIPS only re-analyzes whitelisted files when certain changes have occurred to them. Supported also by hash signatures.
360 Proactive Defense did finally alert to a test executable trying to write to the registry and since it is mostly and basically an Anti-Virus first, i can't expect much more then that.
Hah. I do wish it had an Ignore choice but you can always whitelist a known safe on alert as well as remove it to be detected again.
Again, all in all so far it's ok. A relatively simple fashioned but triple detector AV scanner that actually doesn't get in the dam way every time it takes a notion (heuristic's) to alert you and doesn't go nuts by forcing a stupid scan just because it detected something like a well known other one annoyingly does.
I kind of like it so far.
Bitdefer doesnt update within last 4 days.
And it show up-the-date. Same behavior with baidu.
That's definitely not good.
It's still updating fine for me.
Are you getting BitDefender updates? Can you take a screenshot of your update log?
Just a hunch here.
Does this product update regionally like say kaspersky for instance.
reason i say this,
Some people seem to receive updates and some others dont.
Perhaps there is a regional update issue down the line.
Just a theory anyway.
The log indicates BD hasn't been updated since the 13th, but the program does show that the BD definitions were updated today.
Left - latest BitDefender manual definitions
Right - latest 360 BitDefender definitions
My bitdefender defs are from 6/11. That's kind of concerning.
Mine is 13/06.. although today is 15/6
edit: from Malaysia
That's interesting. It really must be a regional thing then.
Well, with three engines, who cares that one engine lags two to five days, really how much chance do you have to run in a zero day. 2-day, 5-day malware
Baidu and Qihoo battle each other on a lot of area's, unfortunately they share their bugs also, which is an indication of software re-use and inheritance in the wrong way, maybe they hack each others development centres and share the programming code also
The product should work and update as the users expects it to do and currently it doesn't do that, the user/s who get infect with an 0-day (or what ever day) threat surely do care when/if they find out that their AV hasn't updated as expected for days.
Then they had better called their technology "retarded update triple engine" or "triple retarded update engine" .
They also share the look of GUI. When I saw the pictures of Qihoo in this thread first I thought that its just new version of Baidu.
AHA.. How can you know that the 2 engines from Qihoo are high enough to detect something missed by BD ? ...
Thank you for the link, greatly appreciated
hi. i am a big fans of qihoo(chinese), mayb i can explain to you. but sorry for my poor english. lol
1)cloud engine is the most important engine for qihoo, cloud engine is not just a cloud engine. the cloud has the highest priority in 3 of the engine in detection of malware. cloud also providing a "white name-list" for avoiding false alarm, cloud also a channel to collect malware (only unknown PE will be collected). it is soooo important, that why qihoo not allowed to disable it.
3) actually QVM II will only working if the malware is not recognized by their cloud. or, it will be more "useful" only if u are disconnect from internet(cloud). Anyway, the QVM II in the client site just a "small part" in the Whole QVM engine system. The whole QVM II is actually in their lab, i mean, qvm also a part in their cloud. and that's why u still can get the detection from QVM even you disable the QVM in your AV, it is from the cloud =)
well, Qihoo come before baidu.
the reality is, the baidu look like qihoo =)
you are right. they claims qihoo stealing their client privacy for at least 2 years. but yet, no proof at all.
some of the user believe their claim at the begining. But, 2 - 3 years, cant see any actual proof.
qihoo have so much of enemies in IT business line(like baidu, tencent, kingsoft etc) , they hate qihoo soooo much!
therefore, they bcome the most reliable security for us, against qihoo. if qihoo really did something bad, they will definitely take action. actually, they are really put their eyes on qihoo too.
so most of the user change their mind now, they are more support qihoo now. 4million of user, in china =)
tokthoo2002, are you getting the latest BitDefender updates? (check the logs)
I'm stuck at 06-11 here.
hi. im using chinese version n located in Asia now. no problem in updating at all. Anyway, i had report the update problem i found in this thread to qihoo
Just did a manual update few minutes ago and it shows now I'm on:
On the Update Logs it shows Whitelist database updated but nothing about Bitdefender signatures.
I'm in Mexico, if location makes any difference (I honestly don't think so).
Separate names with a comma.