Currently testing other protection setups

Due to compatibility problems with kaspersky I am testing the simplest yet best all around protection I can find but this is very difficult. How well is Avira Premium Security Suite's firewall and how well does it protect against malware, key loggers and anti-phishing? Also if anyone has a recommended compatible setup (does not have to be a suite) please feel free to mention them. For the record I have winxp.

 

Let's not have this devolve into a mindless A vs. B AV comparison thread (as per policy).

As for the thread topic, what are your specific technical requirements?

Blue

 

This isn't a troll topic. I am just looking for the most problem free protection setup that doesn't take to much ram yet does it's job like it should. There are too many protection apps and suites out there to test singularly and too many sponsored review sites that do not give honest opinions or creditials. I figured to help narrow things down I'd ask regular folks whats what. Of course I am avoiding applications like Norton, Mcafee and Trend micro. Right now I am observing Avira, Online Armor and Comodo. I was thinking of trying Eset but I am not hearing to many great things about its threat signatures and ability to catch trojans.

 

What where the "compatibility problems"; did Kaspersky not like a certain product?

How any program cooperates on a computer depends on other software that may be present. Its difficult to recommend a program as being problem free since theres so many variables.

 

Maybe this will be more reasonable to answer in a few days, after release of Avira v8.
The v7 firewall seems not bad for a suite without a HIPS, if you look at the results of testmypcsecurity.com.

About the compatible setup: on my system Avira and NOD32 go well together with Online Armor.
My favorite combination is still NOD32 2.7 and OA, because v2.7 is full featured (web av, mail av) but don't have a proxy.

I also tried KIS 8 beta (which is much lighter than KIS 7) and KAV 8 beta together with OA and didn't recognize considerable problems.

It's difficult to know what to choose, eh?

Cheers

 

There's really not enough to go on here, other than to resort to stating, once again, what each of us uses.

 

Nor was that stated. That said, if you want to solicit useful assessments, you have to provide some underlying context of what's critical to your needs.

To minimize problems, minimize the number of discrete applications. Also, you probably shouldn't focus on RAM consumption, focus on resource consumption as indicated by change in system responsiveness (which is subjective, but operationally most important) or net % CPU time consumed (more objective, but may miss impact at the keyboard).

Quite true on all points. However....

doing this can be as much shooting in the dark as visiting review sites.

There's really no compelling reason to necessarily avoid the products you mention, nor reason to embrace them either. One basic truism is that all antimalware products will, at one time or another, lag on the coverage of specific malware. That's part and parcel of a signature based approaches under evolving challenges.

Without delving into detail regarding you personal usage habits and background - which, in the final analysis, tends to dominate the optimum path for you to follow - I'd recommend something along the following lines:

• If you have a router, great. If not, get one even if you have one PC. The reason: shift the load of handling unsolicited inbound communications off you PC and onto another piece of hardware designed expressly for the task. Verify you don't have a modem/router combo if you're unsure.
• Grab a decent AV. Yes, one can survive well without standard AV coverage, however I tend to consider an AV as a local expert system regarding malware identity. Skip scheduled system scans. Do one up front if you're unsure of the state of your system. Impact of system responsiveness can be partially controlled by configuration, but it's also partially innate to the product. As for specific products - look at the results from wide ranging tests. These tests all have issues, but they provide a decent initial metric to go on. Most of the products discussed extensively here are fine.
• Occasionally, something could possibly evade detection by your AV. Implement a contingency. Since it's a contingency, it should not suck up all your CPU resources nor personal attention. There are many options available on divergent paths. The most effective schemes control execution directly or the scope of impact following execution. Options range from limited user account (LUA) to HIPS systems to various virtualization schemes. The physically most facile approach is likely LUA. It can be inconvenient, but this depends strongly on usage style and applications employed. The inconvenience can be substantially addressed via SuRun. This is a middle road approach. Use a HIPS is you want extreme control over your system, or relinquish that level of direct action via the type of approach provided by AntiExecutable (automatic deny for any "unknown" application).
• If you wish to control outbound communication, get a software firewall. This is more of a control featurein most folks hands.

Trial everything, and change one thing at a time to keep track of likely conflict sources.

Blue

 

And take a full backup (that you have successfully tested the restore functionality) before installing a trial. This makes backout or uninstall complete and simple.

 

You could try Fortinet's customer product 'FortiClient'.

Not the most attractive user interface, but it seems to be a complete and very secure product. Antivirus/Antispyware, robust firewall, antispam and web content filtering.

Scan speed is A+, firewall has various settings for home use, business and isn't intrusive, it monitors your startup programs, and tracks any changes (which you can undo or delete) to your registry. Overall, runs smoothly on XP and Vista (32 and 64).

Sets you back around US$27.

 

i wouldnt recommend Fortinet.

it found 53 infections, all false alarms, on my Drweb machine.

 

But (I'm assuming) those would be listed as just 'suspicious', meaning none would be actioned to be either quarantined or for removal.

So in effect, if it does not request your action on any 'suspicious' files (neither for quarantine or removal), it's given you a clean scan. You don't have to do anything more.

 

no thanks, thats not how an antivirus is supposed to be (flag everything and let the user decide) , this is not proper-protection, and if they cant do this, im guessing they will probably have zero removal, zero rootkit detections and anything else that is worth noting.

the shocking thing was, a few of the files were genuine windows/system32 files.

 

I agree with C.S.J!

Anybody knows of a program named Spyware Detector? Is it a rogue application? A friend of mine had it, It sucks.

 

Give your friend this link, it contains all rogue AS scanners : 349 in total.
http://www.spywarewarrior.com/rogue_anti-spyware.htm

 

Just for the record, it gives about hundrends of false positives

Very good list though, thank u

 

According to Malwarebytes RougeNET it is.

 

Once listed, I don't use any of these scanners, de-listed or not.
This is the most complete list of rogue scanners on the internet and kept up-to-date.

 

How can that be when it was last updated May 4, 2007?

 

When I saw that list for the very first time, it was less than 200 and now 349.
I also compared this list with other lists and those other lists weren't so complete as this one.
How can I possibly know, that this list isn't updated anymore, maybe there is a delay or no new rogue scanners anymore or E. Howes stopped with this website.
Internet is full of out-of-date websites.

 

It's listed on the site.

That would be nice but not true.
New rogue AS,AV and cleaners are found quite often and are discussed here

 

OK. I'm not going to discuss this. As you probably already know, I don't use any scanner anymore.
If you think that this list is so much out-of-date, I won't use it anymore.
One thing is certain : Spyware Detector was mentioned on that list and that was enough for PiCo or his friend.

 

Don't argue guys, even if it wasn't a rogue application, it's crappy as hell

The names rogues use are funny though, Spy Axe, Pest Trap, SpySheriff etc

 

That's fine, I'm just trying to help as so many here have helped me, including yourself.

Yes I know.

It is a bit out of date,yes. But still good for a reference on what to stay away from.

I agree, Listed or delisted on Spyware Warrior, I would stay away from it.
I posted a link to a more current list of rogue apps on post #16.

 

spysherrif or something similar is murder to get rid of....

i got infected with it many years ago when i was using trend micro.

put a black/red desktop background on my machine and kept giving me notifications at the bottom of the screen that nothing could remove, mcafee, norton, avg, spyware doctor all failed to get rid of it.

people should be kept alert to these types of programs.

 

LoneWolf,
Does that forum have a list = E. Howes's list + others, discussed in this forum and finally considered as rogue or not ?