F-Secure Internet Security 2007 opinions?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Kielty, Oct 25, 2006.

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

    Kielty Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Posts:
    139
    Location:
    The Emerald Isle
    Any thoughts on the above software?

    I have been trialling this and although it hogs a fair bit of resources seems to run nicely on recommended settings.

    One thought, it scans predefined files by default. Changing to scan all files takes forever. Is there much of a risk by leaving it scanning predefined files?

    Is it just me or is the spamn filter rubbish? It lets through so many blatantly obvious spam?
     
  2. kai666

    kai666 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2006
    Posts:
    7
    I tried it as I used to have f-secure 2006. I found it painfully slow, so uninstalled it after about half an hour. Boot up took much longer, I clicked a button on the main menu and nothing happened for ages, when it did find viruses, it couldn't get rid of them. I was very disappointed by it

    Currently using Bullguard which is so much better in everyway (so far!)
     
  3. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543
    Hi,

    I installed f-secure is 2007 a few days ago but had to uninstall it because it slowed my pc to a crawl.boot up took also for ever so it was a no go for me.

    I would like to try the f-secure Av but I am not sure I want to do it because I dont want go thru the hassle of unistalling my kav6, installing f-secure only to find out that the f-secure av is a resource hog just like the suite. Too lazy I guess :)
     
  4. Ngwana

    Ngwana Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Posts:
    156
    Location:
    Glasgow, United Kingdom

    1. Most of the potentially problematic files types are predefined, the option to scan all files can be used less frequently.

    2.The 'bundled' spam filter is actually is as good as it gets. The recent problem is that there is spam trying to fool 'spam filters' by taking advantage of how bayesian filters work. What it actually means is that spammers have learnt how spam filters learn, and in turn 'disguise spam' to be let through. All spam filters must adapt once more. So it is not a problem only for F-secure. :D
     
  5. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    in the two years that i have used f-secure i have always used defined files.
     
  6. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    well. ... a hog is too strong a word.

    yes it does take long to boot, but its not the slowest.
    yes scanning speed takes ages, but they have improved.

    f-secure IS 2007 is one of those suites then when you use, you 'feel' super safe, its got sooo much into the package, that a user does not even know about.

    of all the suites i have used, you do feel more secure with f-secure.

    hope that makes sense.

    i would rate it in my top 3 at the moment, along with norton 2007 and avg (Although some things need changing at the moment in avg)
     
  7. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543
    >
     
  8. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    maybe your settings are to high, it does use the kaspersky engine and kaspersky slows down majorly when set too high.

    its definatly not the slowest, maybe try gdata's AVK or ca security suite 2007, they are majorly slow.

    you want a fast suite, avg's, quickest boot up time of them all and runs the fastest.

    depends just what your looking for, whats your main preference in a suite?

    take a look here maybe? https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=151142
     
  9. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543
    Hello,

    depends just what your looking for, whats your main preference in a suite?




    Well, I have kav6 (beta),Outpost 4, SSM free, ewido,adaware , spybot and today I dl spyware terminator. I think I'm pretty much all set. I just wanted to try something else...but I don't see any AV or FW that comes close to the ones I have now




    take a look here maybe? https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=151142[/QUOTE]
     
  10. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    [/QUOTE]

    i hope you aint running all those are the same time, i can see conflicts, and software that just isnt needed.

    spybot, adaware , i think you can ditch them for spyware terminator, or pick your favourite and ditch the other two.

    i think if you want free stuff, try avg with comodo and spyware terminator.

    if you want an all in one, check the link i provided and try one or two and give em a go if your interested in a suite.

    if you dont mind paying, give trend antispyware a go, im sure they will have a trial to try though.
     
  11. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543
    >i hope you aint running all those are the same time, i can see conflicts, and software that just isnt needed.


    No, I have kav6 (proactive defense off), ssm free and outpost 4 (some plugins disabled) at the same time. The other software are used as on-demand scanners only.


    >spybot, adaware , i think you can ditch them for spyware terminator, or pick your favourite and ditch the other two.



    I keep them because many times one prog finds what the other misses u never know :)

    >i think if you want free stuff, try avg with comodo and spyware terminator.



    Comodo ? I have looked into it...was just curious but decided to give it a miss..I will look into avg in the future :p
     
  12. starfish_001

    starfish_001 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Posts:
    1,041
    I use it on and off - it offers very good overall protection but does tend to be heavy on the machine - that said it very good.

    The firewall component is the worst part by far. I'd try Comodo to sup this part
     
  13. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    actually i find the firewall very good....

    also performs well in leaktests.
     
  14. starfish_001

    starfish_001 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Posts:
    1,041
    Interesting - when I tested it it failed a lot of leak test - so I gave up with that component


    tooleaky - pass
    wallbreaker - fail
    dnstester - fail
    leaktest - pass
    breakout - fail
     
  15. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    hmm maybe....

    but dnstester is not what id call a test... doesnt do anything put flush the dns, doesnt even take me off the net.

    and breakout doesnt even work, so dont know how it fails that one.


    -------

    also, there are many other ways to test a firewall and compared to others in suites, the f-secure one is a good one.

    i personally dont just judge a firewall on firewallleaktester, might be a popular site on here, but i dont find it creditable, as quite a few of those tests are poor in my opinion.

    and anyone who can judge look n stop the best firewall, erm .. no thanks.
    i prefer proper tests, in the real world... on the internet, with real hackers and people trying to get things from a PC, if you know where to test these things... you can judge the good against the bad, i assure you.

    so forgive me to take what firewallleaktester has to say as ... nothing more than hearsay.

    i will not be one of the 'fools' to judge an antivirus just on av-comparatives and firewalls just on firewallleaktester.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2006
  16. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543
    Do you think f.l.tester is no good ? and av-comparatives ?
     
  17. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Although F-Secure uses a lot of memory, it seems to run well with other applications. At least on my system that is the case.

    I do not notice the memory usage. At start I have several programs going for an update, and the start is a little slower that KAV 6 which I have on my desktop with the same applications as the laptop.

    On balance I like F-Secure. If it runs well, set and forget, I will tolerate the slower start.

    Avira was faster than either, but it did not run well. I hope they get the update, not opening in the tray, and guard not always active at start problems fixed.

    Best,
    Jerry
     
  18. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i dont think f.l.tester is good enough to test a firewall on and yes, some of their so called tests are poo-poo.

    we know av comparatives is a good test... but not enough to judge on whether you use this or that antivirus.
     
  19. starfish_001

    starfish_001 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Posts:
    1,041
    I'd agree there is more to testing than leak tests or GRC. Personally I like Outpost as a firewall - Comodo is not bad - LNS is ok but not for me.


    I'd agree that FIS is one of the very best suites out but I prefer KIS overall as a suite. Or to install FSAV with a separate firewall component

    The right product is probably one that the user is happy using....
     
  20. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543
    Ok, in ur opinion, f.l.tester is not good enough and a-v. comparatives no so great too but in my experience, when I had to pick a fw and an antivirus I almost always checked those sites and never went wrong.not yet. I used ZA a long time ago then..LNS,Kerio and outpost and they were/are all good. As for avs, I used antivir ( a long time ago and it was a piece of junk..now they say it got better but I'll pass on that)..Norton (ages ago), then Nod32 and Kav for the past few years.

    Most of them were on those sites and them sites did help me pick the right one..for me at least :p
     
  21. larryb52

    larryb52 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Posts:
    1,126
    you'll be secure but it's a slow boot & a bit heavy but you do feel secure, do watch false positives...
     
  22. Kielty

    Kielty Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Posts:
    139
    Location:
    The Emerald Isle
    Thanks for everyones contributions, i find that after a relatively slow start up things run smoothly and quickly. ok the ram usage is high but i have 2gb of ram and it doesn't seem to cause any major speed issues. I was a little concerned over leaving the scan settings on 'predefined files' but it seems from previous posts this is not a major security issue.

    Although a full scan 'everything' would take hours, a full system scan on 'predefined files' takes less than an hour to cover 75gb.

    FIS works smoothly with every other piece of software on my system.

    The only thing that really annoys me is the spamfilter. MS outlook's junk filter seems to do a better job!
     
  23. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006

    i never seem to get along with antispam in suites.
    i just use my ISP's spam filter and what ever gets through delete it.
    its a good suite and if you done mind the memory usage and the slow down its fine.
    always loads up and hardly any errors maybe update issues sometimes.
    I am switching to nod32 because my pc is getting old and cant really handle f-secure anymore.
    when i first had my pc and at the time f-secure 2005 my pc was super fast but my pc was brand new at the time so it wasnt surprising. basically this is a goodbye to f-secure and telling you my experience of it.
    the only barrier now is my dad and ive got to get his permisson to use nod32 instead should be able to install within a few weeks.
    lodore
     
  24. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    the memory usage isnt all that bad, memory usage means absolutly nothing for how it runs, some of the highest ram programs, run the best.

    avg suite can use 40mb up to very high sometimes.... and it runs the best by far of any suite ive tried, boot up time is below any other suite aswell.

    i think if your machine can handle the ram usage of any security software, it shouldnt be a worry at all, also ... how many processes it runs, does this even matter? .. erm NO, but certain people seem to think they do.
     
  25. Creekside Rogue

    Creekside Rogue Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Posts:
    30
    Location:
    Cave Spring, Georgia, USA
    Hi all:

    I've just recently trialed F-Secure 2007 as well, and frankly, it worked very well for me. Enough to purchase a 3-user license. I can't agree about it being a resource hog. The whole suite uses up only about 58-63k on my machine. Contrast this with McAfee Internet Security (158k). Panda's current suite ran at around 90k. Norton 2007 appears to run somewhere around 60k on my machine. But my task manager can't see any of it's running processes. I also note that Trend Micro's 2007 security suite runs over 135k.

    Please forgive the use of the lower case k. Should I be using the upper case letter? Or should I just put three 0's after the initial figures? Oh Well. Most fo the readers here know what I mean. As far as scan time, I'm not too overly bothered since I know from AV comparatives that F-Secure is ranked fairly high in detection rating. I like the new features, like DeepScan. My machine, an XP Home, P4 2.4 ghz with 1 gig of RAM seems to run F-Secure 2007 effortlessly.

    If you want a faster scan, I would suggest NOD32 or Panda. Antivir runs fairly quickly on my wife's laptop. My only problem with F-Secure 2007 is getting it installed properly on her computer. I've already installed F-Secure on my desktop and laptop.

    Personally, if NOD32 already had a security suite available, I would probably be using it instead. That's something I'll consider next year after my F-Secure subscription runs out, and if Eset has actually delivered their new suite as promised.

    Creekside Rogue
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.