free avast modules, which are you using?

No, this is not true. The Network Shield contains the URL Blocker which you really want (does something else than the firewall).

 

Dude, you seriously need to let it go...

 

Same here! All......

 

How necessary is the Script Shield?

 

I'm using the following shields:

File System Shield
Web Shield
Network Shield
Behavior Shield

I did have Script Shield, but it did nothing since I use Chrome.

 

Which are unnecessary duplicates anyways.

 

I use 'em all, default setup out of the box.....

 

I use them all on a laptop and can't tell that they affect performance so I see no need to shut any off either.

 

Not true at all. People go overboard with plugins & add-ons when they don't need to. The poster stated they used Adblock Plus and 'script block' (presumably NoScript):

1. If a 'trusted' site gets infected, then usually it'll try to run an exploit that is hosted on a 3rd party site and not the 'trusted' site - this will be blocked by NoScript;

2. Adblock Plus has subscriptions for privacy, tracking, and Malware lists, e.g. Malware Domains will block scripts, images, and Flash content from known bad sites.

This covers a LOT of web infection vectors.

The browser should be contained anyway IMO (e.g. Sandboxie is much lighter than Noscript anyway, so I use it in place of). Also an alternative DNS and a HOSTS file (MVPS/MalwareDomainList) are useful and relatively light additions - and these beat Avast network shield to the punch every time in my own testing.

Won't hurt to leave the web shield on, just in the rare case that a trusted site hosts the exploit itself and the web shield can detect either the code obfuscation or the exploit itself. Turning the shields on or off makes little difference to the performance of the computer so may as well leave all the features on except the slow autosandbox.

 

Good Evening ! Currently have all Shields operational...and everything functioning flawlessly...with Avast A.I.S. 6.0.1203. Sincerely...Securon

 

I think it works only with internet explorer 32-bit , if you are using other browser it is useless.
I'm not sure of this, someone please confirm this.

 

using only the behavior module here

 

I used Avast with all shields and Panda Cloud for 2 months.
I never got any duplicate detections but on the other hand all Panda Cloud detected was false positive after false positive, so I got rid of it.

Panda Cloud didn't detect anything but false positives which leads me to believe that Avast is better. If Panda Cloud was able to detect malware that Avast missed, then it would be useful to me but it never did.

Still use all the shields of Avast, they don't slow down my system and they are there if I ever need them.

Thanks.

 

I meant duplicate detections within Avast, because the modules use the same signatures (and very similar engines).

I still wouldn't use all of it with Panda Cloud, which will mean less compatibility and more resource usage.

 

Same here, I run Avast along with RSS pro 2011.

 

Same signatures - yes, but "plain" signatures are only part of the detections. More complex detections take the context into account - such as what is the particular event/action that triggered the scan. So the detections don't necessarily behave the same in different shields.

Besides, you are assuming that the engine is able to unpack every possible archive/installer format when the WebShield takes place - which is definitely wrong.
So you download an installer, WebShield can't see the context (i.e. doesn't see anything wrong), you install that thing, new files are created on your disk (which would normally be detected, but they are not because you don't have the FileSystem Shield) - and you can simply run them and get infected.

 

Behavior shield is functional even when file-system shield is disabled :

i recently discovered that file system shield is installed even when selecting only the behavior shield in custom install :

 

do you mean you can't install the behavior shield without file sytem shield?

do you trust only of behavior shield?

cheers

 

exactly, you can't install the behavior shield without file sytem shield :

it is not only installed, this is enabled!
i have already an on-access scanner, i just want a behavior blocker

 

I really wouldn't consider avast's behavior shield as a behavior blocker.

 

There aren't unnecessary shields on avast.
The Shields have different settings and allow a high protection for the weakest points in your computer. File Shield could be set to a balance between protection and performance when you use the high protection of the other shields.

 

it asked me about suspicious events (not a behavior! : ) when running malware samples

 

what would u consider it then? lol

not universally unnecessary, but for some people, certain shields are unnecessary.

 

I don't install the IM, P2P or mail shield. I don't use IM or P2P and all my mail servers are online. Hence not needing them. I don't understand why you would install everything if your not going to utilize it.

 

I would call it placebo shield