alternatives for NOD32???

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by radicalb21, Dec 14, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. radicalb21

    radicalb21 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Posts:
    164
    Location:
    USA
    With all the recent problems with NOD32 what would you reccommend as a choice for an antivirus as my license is coming up for a renewal in a couple of weeks. Any and all help would be appreciated.

    subject line altered to reflect the real question
     
  2. LowWaterMark

    LowWaterMark Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Posts:
    17,876
    Location:
    New England
    Re:problems w/ NOD32o_O

    There are many good options out there. If any single anti-virus were "the one and only best" for everyone, then there wouldn't be more products than that one in existence. But, currently there are many. :doubt:

    The key is to evaluate a few of them yourself and decide what works best for you on your specifc system.

    Best of luck in your search.
     
  3. sig

    sig Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    716
    Re:problems w/ NOD32o_O

    You probably should give KAV Personal a try out if you're looking for good alternatives.
     
  4. radicalb21

    radicalb21 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Posts:
    164
    Location:
    USA
    Re:problems w/ NOD32o_O

    What can you tell me about KAV Personal?
     
  5. sig

    sig Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    716
    KAV is considered by many to be one of the best AV's around. Huge database, good coverage for trojans also. A bit heavy on resources for some people if one doesn't make some adjustments in the settings. (There have been threads here and elsewhere on how to do that.) Frequent updates, they really appear to keep on top of things.
    Some people use it as an AV/AT all in one solution, although many people also run an AT with KAV.

    There are other products that use the KAV engine but I've not looked into them. No doubt others will come and expand on KAV and related apps.

    I mention KAV Personal since reportedly KAV Pro (@ around $100) is probably more than most people need or want. There'a s KAV forum here if you want to browse and ask questions: http://forums.useice.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard.cgi?s=3f88e6c614ebffff;act=SF;f=1;st=15 .

    McAfee also is supposed to be good, but a number of people don't like the Security Center that comes with it and it sounds like it tends to Borg one's PC like NAV (or worse) based on some reports I've seen when people tried to uninstall it.
     
  6. Buddel

    Buddel Guest

    KAV is a very good choice. Kaspersky's support - unlike the support of some other AV vendors - is great, too. However, it goes without saying that neither KAV nor any other AV is "perfect". Just get yourself a couple of trial version to find out which AV is best for your needs and your computer system.
     
  7. Q Section

    Q Section Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2003
    Posts:
    771
    Location:
    Headquarters - London & Field Offices -Worldwide
    Hello radicalb21

    Did we miss something? Please mention the problems to which you are referring. Thank you.
     
  8. Paul Wilders

    Paul Wilders Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2001
    Posts:
    12,472
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Qsection,

    No offense intended, but the above quoted is not about the question asked in the subject line. Please no off topic discussion in this thread - let's keep on target ;)

    regards.

    paul
     
  9. solarpowered candle

    solarpowered candle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    1,181
    Location:
    new zealand
    30 day trial download links for Kav Lite /personal / Pro
    http://www.nest-soft.co.uk/kaspersky/index.htm
     
  10. dos

    dos Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Posts:
    43
    Personally I dont like KAV (or its users that troll ;)), it is too heavy on resources, takes too long to scan, and has too many false positives. If you're looking for an excellent alternative I'd recommend you give F-Secure a try, it's one of the best I've ever used.
     
  11. Buddel

    Buddel Guest

    Is F-Secure lighter on resources than KAV?
     
  12. JimIT

    JimIT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,035
    Location:
    Denton, Texas
    You might also consider using F-Prot, as well. It's lightweight, and very compatible w/many system setups.

    Regarding KAV clones:

    www.extendia.com

    This AV (single-engine version) can also be obtained in the States at retailers such as OfficeMax and Wal-Mart for under $10.

    Another KAV-based AV (which I cannot find mention of anywhere) is Defender Pro, which contains a firewall, and what appears to be a version of KAV-lite.

    It, too is available at Wal-Mart, OfficeMax, etc. The licensing covers all the computers in your household, so it's a good deal, as well.

    Best of luck in your search.
     
  13. Not in my case...

    Comparing FSecure to KAV, KAV ran better and was more configurable. Also, it didn't have any email scanning at all...

    I would recommend as alternatives to NOD32...

    ETrust - Innoculate
    FProt
    Command
    NAV (No kidding., it's very good...LOL)
    McAFee, if you can live with the security center...

    But I like KAV for the support... Some guy named Sir_Carew claims he's not happy with the department that you submit Virus samples to, but I never had a problem...
     
  14. Buddel

    Buddel Guest

    I can't confirm this, either. F-Secure proved to be more "resource-hungry than KAV on my computer.

    Some more reasons why I would not recommend F-Secure. I can also recommend the AV's Straight Shooter mentioned. They are pretty good and all of them are definitely worth trying.
     
  15. AgentX

    AgentX Guest

    Hi there!
    My experience with F-Secure has never been a good one.
    Everytime I installed it on my WinXP sp1 machine, it caused a BSOD on startup.
    (Tested with the latest Client Security demo). Maybe it's because I install and test
    a new AV software almost every week. :D

    I personally don't like software which tries to solve all your problems. Hey! If you're
    selling an AV, just do that. Adding a *very basic* firewall, spy stoppers, too many
    addins, 50 new processes ...is way too much to bother with.

    I've tested (not professionally) many AV and AT programs in past. I consider myself not
    a guru of this arena but someone who likes to take the software to a ride alongwith.

    Here are some AV programs I tested on my WinXP sp1 machine:-

    Dr.Web 4.30a
    -----------------
    Overall a very good AV software. Installation footprint is very small and updates are
    no different. Many dislike it for it's False Positives (read Heuristics). However, I think
    they like NOD32's AH for the same reason ;)

    Its heuristics are very good but can confuse a novice and convince him/her enough
    to delete a system file. For this reason, I recommend it as your backup on-demand
    scanner.

    Kaspersky Personal Pro
    ------------------------------
    An excellent AV *package*. Comes with extra frills like Office protection and integrity
    checker (Inspector). Its engine is very robust and has been used in many others'
    software like eScan, AVK, F-Secure etc. The package also features a script-blocker
    which works flawlessly. Many have reported that it performs slowly than many others.
    I beg to disagree. If you've configured it right, you can't get wrong with it. I've used
    it on my Celeron 400/256MB SDRAM and it performed better than NAV2003.

    If you can afford its terse configuration and price, I recommend it as your all purpose
    antivirus software.

    RAV
    -----
    I wonder why I'm even including it here. The mightly bubba of software industry, the
    fearless Micro$oft has taken control over it. But, it was a good software. Its speed,
    the unpacking capability and the *eye candy* were unmatched and unsurpassed.

    Unfortunately, it's all over now. But you can still get a demo from their site.
    I recommend it only to antique collectors. ;)

    Symantec/Norton
    ----------------------
    I've worked with both the corporate and the home *Norton* versions. I agree the
    corporate versions are more effective, require less memory ...but neither of them perform
    well enough to get recommended by me. Sorry Symantec! It's about time. Now, even
    the free ones perform better than this beast.

    Not recommended by me.

    F-Secure
    -----------
    I already mentioned it crashed on my machine, so I couldn't test it to its limits. Although,
    I found one of my friends using the Internet Security version (v2003) and he wasn't very
    happy with it. Problems arise when you integrate too much functionality in one product.
    Many are unhappy with the BackWeb, others dislike its firewall. I hate its instability.
    The CounterSign technology doesn't help it perform better that its daddy. KAV still
    outperforms it in many tests (except one, of course). It's like keeping three Desert Eagles
    with you all the time. Bad choice!

    Their product list will only confuse you more. They've got Internet Security 2004,
    AntiVirus 2004, Client Security 5.5x and AV for Workstations ...all desktop products.
    Which one is perfect for you? You decide! What's the point in developing a thousand
    clones of something that doesn't work right. It translates to *Chaos*.

    Not recommended by me, until they build a more robust architecture for their software.

    Trend Micro PC-Cillin
    -------------------------
    A very good piece of software. Unfortunately, a very basic firewall is lurking here too. Sigh!
    Had they not included this crap, I'd have chosen it as my all time favorite AV. Lately, I've
    found that it's possible to remove the firewall, but you can't choose not to install it.
    At least, they could continue with a checkbox choice like the previous versions.

    The AV engine is among the best ones, despite of the fact that it doesn't feature many
    unpackers. Remember that AV business is not about unpacking only. A good in-memory
    scanner should stop an unpacking trojan/virus right in its way.

    The new version (Internet Security 11 aka PC-Cillin 2004) adds many new features.
    See their product description for a full feature set. Overall, it's a good product.

    I recommend it to novices and experts alike. Though, I know experts like to keep a backup
    handy ...just in case ;)

    McAfee Enterprise 7.1
    ---------------------------
    This is the AV I'm currently using on my PC.
    Earlier, I had enjoyed the 7.x Peofessional edition very much. *Unfortunately* that version
    also came with a firewall. Oh man!! When the version 8 came, I decided to give it a try.
    What a disappointment! Take my words for it, version 8 is doomed to fail. It's detined to
    unfortunate, not unlike Norton 2004.

    I was almost going to try something else (eXtendia/GDATA AVK), when I found the
    Enterprise version on Network Associates. Believe me, this version is very sleek (7.5MB),
    very fast and much more reliable than many in this list. Fortunately enough, it doesn't
    even come with a firewall this time :D

    It detects the Virii/Trojans/Malware as you enter into their respective directories. It's also
    quite good at stopping malware from the net. Though I still haven't taken it to an extreme,
    from what I see, makes me say that it's impressive.

    I recommend it as your on-access scanner along with an on-demand scanner like DrWeb
    or Kaspersky.

    Bottom line - You have to test it to believe it. Try as many as you can and continue
    using which you like best. I think most of the regulars here will agree that it's good
    to keep separate on-access and on-demand scanners.

    Even though some AV's like Kaspersky can detect most of the trojans, you should arm
    yourself with a good AT software. TDS-3 comes to the mind. Others like The Cleaner
    and TrojanHunter are good too. BOClean is the best in-memory trojan scanner money
    can buy.

    There are many other good AV products which I've not tested yet. eXtendia/GDATA AVK
    is one of them. Would someone please post a full review of this product in near future?

    Hope it helps!
    AgentX
     
  16. Godzilla

    Godzilla AV Expert

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2003
    Posts:
    63

    :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
    Based on what tests ? With polymorphic viruses i doub't this result....
     
  17. AgentX

    AgentX Guest

    I made it very clear in my previous post that I didn't test all those AV programs in a very
    professional way. I collected a rather small set of different virii like old DOS ones, CIH types,
    rootkits, a few worms, and many ItW malware. I also packed some myself using readymade
    tools available everywhere.

    My post was meant to help someone finding alternatives to NOD32, which itself is a very
    good antivirus. It wasn't meant to compete with VB or Rokop tests in any manner.
    You are advised to disregard it in case of any doubt. However, I'd like to see more such
    posts (like BlackCat did with F-Prot) ...as they seem to help novices more than mere pie
    charts.

    I know PC-Cillin never had the brightest record when it comes to polymorphic virii. But, no
    one can deny that it's a robust product. IMHO, not a single AV software is capable of
    handling every sort of evil-code out there. Let me tell you, Dr.Web missed the Blaster worm
    once on my PC, even when Anti-Hacker was installed. So would you call it a mediocre one
    just because it missed one of the most common nasties? I woudn't. I know I never had a
    problem with my PC-Cillin 2002. It handles Blaster et al quite well. The network virus alert
    is a very good feature and can really save a novice's day.

    Also, I recommended it as an on-access scanner because of its speed. I know many who
    own KAV but use it only as an on-demand one. KAV is certainly not the best in heuristics,
    but it's still recommended as one of the best ones. I never saw someone backing McAfee
    for its superb polymorphics abilities and unpacking. Rokop confirms this, by the way.

    As you can see, I never posted any test statistics at all. So calling it a *test* is not true,
    at least technically. It was only a short review, a pros here and a cons there, that's all.

    Regards,
    AgentX
     
  18. illukka

    illukka Spyware Fighter

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    633
    Location:
    S.A.V.O
     
  19. solarpowered candle

    solarpowered candle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    1,181
    Location:
    new zealand
    illukka thats a pretty tidy defence . you proberbly wouldnt need an anti trojan , but just out of curiosity do you run one?
     
  20. Q Section

    Q Section Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2003
    Posts:
    771
    Location:
    Headquarters - London & Field Offices -Worldwide
    We hereby withdraw our inquiry. We apologise. :cool:
     
  21. illukka

    illukka Spyware Fighter

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    633
    Location:
    S.A.V.O
    SPC they're running on different computers.. i run trojan hunter just in case on both...
     
  22. Tuulilapsi

    Tuulilapsi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2002
    Posts:
    53
    I find it hard to believe KAV uses more resources and has more false positives than F-Secure when F-Secure uses the KAV engine along with Libra (Was it?) and Orion. I've run both, and F-Secure is the heavier of the two. And faster? F-Secure is just as slow as KAV. (As if that meant anything. These are AV scanners, not F1 cars.)
     
  23. Buddel

    Buddel Guest

    Good point. I don't care how long an AV needs to scan my computer as long as it detects all viruses. There is no point in using an "F1 AV" ;) if it fails to detect some nasties.
     
  24. illukka

    illukka Spyware Fighter

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    633
    Location:
    S.A.V.O
    the libra engine seems to add the resource demand of f-secure..

    but the 5.41 version with f-prot engine was easier on resources than kav. true it utilizes the kav engine but it is coded differently than kasperskys monitor.. let's call it intelligence or optimization or something, but it was a lot faster than kasperskys..
    actually i've read from somewhere that kaspersky were aiming towards f-secures rtm style in the forthcoming 5x version..

    still i like kaspersky better, i like to tweak settings and using them both i've noticed that kaspersky adds new nasties faster..other thing is kasperskys very detailed reports after scan..
    for some one who likes it simple but effective f-secure is very good. it's designed to be completely automatic(transparent) and it's default settings are very safe..it's for those people that happily click on everything.. geez what is this new cool screensaver uncle ben has sent me......LOL

    as for detections i do not believe f-secure detecting more than kav. with the f-prot engine it was possible that there was signatures for some viruses that kaspersky did not have coz f-prot have been around for a long time.. longer than kaspersky i believe.. f-secure and kaspersky seem to share updates.. how could it be that with same signatures other detects more? heuristics...? no i don't believe, orion is a very good heuristic engine but better than kav's code analyzer...

    sorry about being off topic here
     
  25. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I realize a lot of people don't like mcafee but I have never had a problem with it since version 6 came out. At present I am useing mcafee 7.03 and I like it very much very easy on resourses considering it is a large program. :D
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.