AV Recommendations

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Dazed_and_Confused, Mar 24, 2004.

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

    Dazed_and_Confused Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Posts:
    1,831
    Location:
    USA
    I'm in the process of upgrading my system's security software. Just registered TDS-3. and a very fine tool it is. ;) Currently using AVG Free as my AV, but I've heard it's weak. I want only the best - been burned too many times. Any recommendations?
     
  2. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2004
  3. Ailric

    Ailric Guest

    You want only the best AV? Welcome to Kaspersky. McAfee is also in the same ballbark.

    A good idea is to check the various AV tests, download a demo and see how it runs on your system.

    Some tests/reviews:
    http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=62&mnu=62
    http://www.virusbtn.com/index.xml
    http://www.pcmag.com/category2/0,4148,4796,00.asp
    http://antivirus.about.com/cs/beforeyoubuy/tp/aatpavwin.htm?PM=ss11_antivirus
    http://www.av-comparatives.org/



    * fixed link url to allow it to work

    bigc
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2004
  4. steve1955

    steve1955 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Posts:
    1,384
    Location:
    Sunny(in my dreams)Manchester,England
    If you are already using TDS3 I'd go for NOD,you dont really need the extra trojan protection offered by KAV, McFee,etc and NOD is far lighter on your system,but as already advised try a few of the trials and see which YOU prefer
     
  5. If you want the best in Anti-virus software, there is only one and true protection against attacks existing and those that have yet to be created. INVIRCIBLE is by far the leader and it is too often overlooked and missed as the users, testers, and media all ignore this product and totally brain washed by the Norton product which is a true night mare as it has messed up several systenms i have installed it on and to uninstall it and then manually clean the registry.

    Invircible can be found at invircible.com. It is not free, but then if you want true protection against any virus, this is the product that will keep you from being burned.

    i know there are other users out ther of this product and would like to hear from them and also why the media ignores this proven product which is true Anti-virus computer warfare.

    Randy
     
  6. Bdiamond

    Bdiamond Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Posts:
    74
    Location:
    N Carolina, USA
    You may also wish to take a look at F-secure. I have been using it for about 18 months and have found it to be really reliable, simple and easy to use. Updates are daily or more often and it consumes relatively little of machine resources.

    It probably competes in the same general category as the Kasperskyand NOD products but those details can better be described by others here who are more knowledgable than I am.

    They do have a free trial period and you may wish to give it a try. It is a pleasure to use.

    Bdiamond
     
  7. cpsjr

    cpsjr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Posts:
    1
  8. Trans

    Trans Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Posts:
    76
    :D
     

    Attached Files:

  9. dangitall

    dangitall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Posts:
    430
    Location:
    New Hamster, USA
    Folks can bash it all they want, but I've had nothing but good luck with Norton.
     
  10. spamcat

    spamcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    28
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    This response has nothing to do with the actual effectiveness of the InVircible product as I have never used it and I am not inclined to in the future. There seems to be very little actual testing of the product that doesn't date back to the 90s, and what I have been able to find certainly is not flattering to the product with substandard results being the norm.

    I would suggest that you read the following:

    http://www.idg.co.nz/magazine/pcworld/may98/invircib.htm

    http://www.claws-and-paws.com/virus/papers/invircib.shtml

    http://www.pc-help.org/www.nwinternet.com/pchelp/lockdown/Davis/Paris.htm

    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/vess.htm

    http://madchat.org/vxdevl/papers/av-oriented/ivdebunk.txt

    http://www.idg.co.nz/magazine/pcworld/jul98/mailbox.htm

    as these links are representative of the media opinions and the subsequent attacks initiated by the InVircible author. History has shown that reviews that provided negative feedback on the product were met with unfounded threats of legal action, lies, manipulation, attempts at personal discredidation, and other questionable practices.

    Once again I have no personal experience with the product, but I believe the referenced articles can certainnly provide insight on why the media neglects the InVircible product.

    spamcat
    :cool:


    url's repaired==bigc
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2004
  11. optigrab

    optigrab Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Posts:
    624
    Location:
    Brooklyn/NYC USA
    More discussion about InVircible, here at Wilders.

    http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=14440

    Note that my impression was similar to Spamcat (and neither of us were motivated to try it), though FireFighter reported on a couple of occasions he's impressed with the product.

    As for the original "recommendations" request of the thread, I would add that there are a LOT of posts here at Wilders from satisfied users of NOD32, Dr. Web, KAV, McAfee, F-Secure, and even NAV. The best way to evaluate this feedback is to pore over the threads carefully. As has been writte here countless times, the best can't be determined by reported detection rates alone - there are too many other variables.
     
  12. Dazed_and_Confused

    Dazed_and_Confused Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Posts:
    1,831
    Location:
    USA
    Well, I've had problems in the past with McAffee (software conflicts), in addition to poor detection performance. :mad:

    I've not seen any viruses since installing AVG Free 18 months ago, but that may be a fluke. :doubt: It may also have something to do with the daily update routine. What I really like about AVG is it seems to use a small amout on resources, compared to McAffee. But I've heard it much weaker at detection that most.

    I've read posts here on Wilders, and NOD32 and Kaspiersky seem to be the hands-down favorite, and are both good at detection. Which of these in your opinion is the lighter and faster app?
     
  13. Ailric

    Ailric Guest

    NOD32 is definitely faster and lighter than KAV 4.5. It a very good antivirus with excellent heuristics and improved unpacking. The interface is streamlined and easy to work with. Why not download a demo and give it a whirl? Just make sure you don't have another AV running.

    I also recommend F-Prot for Windows for those concerned with performance. Dr. Web is also a lite performer with great detection.

    KAV (and those that use the KAV engine) is king. It's unpacking, trojan and malware detection is unrivaled.
    NOTE: KAV 5.0 is in beta testing now. With it's improved user interface and better resource usage, it may well be worth waiting for.
     
  14. Dazed_and_Confused

    Dazed_and_Confused Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Posts:
    1,831
    Location:
    USA
    Thanks. I'm using TDS-3, so I'm feeling pretty good about the AT protection right now. And a "light" application is important to me, so I think I'm going to try NOD32 first. :rolleyes:
     
  15. meneer

    meneer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2002
    Posts:
    1,132
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    As I stated before (but, who am I?), ojectively there is no best scanner. Perhaps NOD outperforms every other on VB tests and is the fastest around, I don't like the user interface (but again, who am I).

    Pick any of the scanners mentioned here (and do not count the preference score) and try them all out for yourself. Not only do get get free protection for a year or so ;), but you get the first hand experience too.

    And remember: even the best scanner can be fooled, or will get it's signatures updated a minute too late (I have to find the results of the signature publishing reaction speed of AV makers, I'll post them here later today).

    -update-
    http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/columns/executive_tech/article.php/3316511
    http://www.pcwelt.de/news/viren_bugs/37827/
     
  16. bob_man_uk

    bob_man_uk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Posts:
    91
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    If you want a good piece of software i definetly recomend Panda software its kind of light on resources tho the install is a long one, the virus database is now 72,000 strong and still climbing it updates whenever theres an internet connection, if you are using windows 9X[me=bob_man_uk]I wouldnt recomend using the firewall but the rest of it is top noch stuff. [/me]
     
  17. spamcat

    spamcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    28
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Since I didn't actually make a recommendation in my earlier post:

    I agree with the majority of posters in saying that there is not one perfect AV solution. Pick out some of the reputable AV solutions (most of those mentioned such as NAV, McAfee, NOD32, Kaspersky, etc. are) and try out the demo versions and see what you like. I am a NOD32 user and chose it over KAV 4.5 due to interface, resource usage (and I have a fast computer), and the fact that I have a good AT installated (BOClean).

    I prefer these AV's over NAV and McAfee primarily due to the speed of virus definition updates and their model where you buy a one-year license to the product when you purchase and not just a year of virus definitions. When a new version of the product is released (ie, soon to be released KAV 5.0 or NOD32 2.0 last year) you just download and install using your current password or keyfile.

    Good luck,
    spamcat
    :cool:
     
  18. bellgamin

    bellgamin Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    5,648
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Of course there IS a *perfect AV* -- available at any hardware store for <$5. :rolleyes:

    Seriously, though, oh feline personage -- DrWeb is my recommendation. Bang for the buck & so forth. Yah

    bellgamin
    ~~~~~~~
    Even if you COULD have everything, where would you put it?
     
  19. liang_mike

    liang_mike Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Posts:
    91
    Location:
    Canada
    I am also using F-Secure
     
  20. Main Event

    Main Event Guest

    TDS-3 already installed? Go with NOD32, your best bet.
     
  21. njguy99007

    njguy99007 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Posts:
    4
    Location:
    New Jersey
    Hello all, I have had Nortons but with Avast AV Home edition which is free by the way, and it has auto updates or you can update anytime you like.

    Here is a link in case anyone is interested, i have been using it for almost 6 months now and it caught a few naughty bad boys trying to get in.
    http://www.avast.com/

    Check it ouy it is better tahn AVG which i also have tried.

    Nj Guy here
     
  22. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Posts:
    77
    Dazed_and_Confused

    If there is one thing I have learned about computers in the short time I have been using them , it is that no two systems are exactly alike, what works for me may not for you .
    all programs mentioned in the above posts have advantages and disadvantages, you have to find out what program works best with your system and to do that you must trial as many as you think necessary .

    Good Luck
    Frank
     
  23. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,728
    Location:
    Texas
    F-Prot is very light on resources and the company is a pleasure to deal with.
    They are still improving the program for Windows. It will unpack a zip file with no problems.
    In ten years of computing, F-Prot, the DOS version, caught the only malware I have ever had on my computer.
    Runs like a champ on XP.
     
  24. meneer

    meneer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2002
    Posts:
    1,132
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    So, now that's settled, Dazed_and_Confused need no longer worry.

    One thing is for certain, there is no consensus in this community. I don't think that I saw etrust mentioned here, lets add to the confusion, right :)

    The conclusion: there are lots of fine antivirus scanners out there. Most of the sacnners mentioned here are good in terms of detecting, preventing en correcting infections. I would say that any of these scanners are good enough. Main differences:
    - detecting trojans (do you need that in an AV scanner, or will you go for a dedicated AT
    - speed and update practice
    - price (do you want a paid subsription or not)

    I just thought of another help to compare: how about checking the virus info pages on the AV sites. Perhaps not really important to judge the scanner quality, but just some extra to get a feeling for the product.

    It's up to you to pick your scanner. Make sure YOU like it. So try them all, it seems you can't go wrong with any of these scanners.

    This kind of thread always looks like a religious thing, doesn't it?
     
  25. Adam

    Adam Guest

    I use Nod32 for resident antivirus memory scanning (fast and light), TDS-3 for resident antitrojan memory scanning and on-demand scanning, and KAV for on-demand "complete" scanning. I also use process guard to keep these processes running. A multi-tiered approach with overlapping heuristics and databases seems to be the most likely to protect . I keep as few processes running for resident memory scanning as possible and favor the lighter/faster ones for this.

    Some considerations:

    1. I use IMAP and SSL (SecureBat!) for email. Currently, NOD32 does not scan IMAP messages - you have to rely on AMON once an attachment is saved, and if it is packed, once it's open. I prefer multi-tiered protection, so scaning all email through my IMAP channel and via a plugin for SecureBat! (all of which KAV does) is useful to me. Basically, KAV does a better job of integrating on-demand scanning automaticity into email apps - and this is particularly important if you use SSL to send/receive mail as no port scanner will be able to see anything.

    2. Whenever I get an attachment, I scan it with NOD advanced heuristics (since it's already been scanned by KAV). Two is better than one.

    3. It's true that NOD's strong point is antivirus and its heuristics, though they are evidenlty adding trojan/worm profiles to the database aggressively. TDS-3 will pick up the slack in this area, and KAV provides a double layer of protection.

    -Adam
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.