FSAV vs. KAV

I have been looking for *the* anti-virus program for quite a time. After carefully studying different AV's i'm left to decide between F-Secure Anti-Virus or Kaspersky Anti-Virus. The price isn't important factor (the money won't be out of my wallet)! I just want the best protection against viruses, trojans etc.

Could you guys give me your recommendations which one should I go for and why?

 

Where does F-secure fall into these two categories forum admin? I mean F-secure AV has three scanning engines including KAV!

So how can the AV be worse than KAV Pro?

Forum Admin, does F-Secure offer ultimate protection against both viruses and trojans or what?

 

So does the KAV have better anti trojan capabilities than FSAV?

How about virus detection rate? Which one is better in this field?

Best Wishes,
Toni

 

Thats odd that you say AVP has better trojan detection and heuristics than FSAV, as FSAV incorporates multiple virus scanners including AVP!

Well can you explain why AVP tojan capabilities are better than AVP?

 

I think what fatpizzaman was trying to ask that how (or atleast I want to know) come KAV has better anti-trojan capabilities than FSAV. Even FSAV is using (also) the same engine as KAV?

Do you think that KAV would be best all around solution if you want to run only one program to block both viruses and trojans?

Best Wishes,
Toni

 

You are spot on Tony

 

I too am interested in Pauls reply.
If I may put my two cents in. I believe the KAV engine in F-Secure is an older engine, not the latest version Kaspersky has. I think you will find this in all programs that incorporate other AV companys engines.
The strength in Kaspersky mostly comes from two things. An excellent virus and trojan base, updated daily. The other strength is in KAVs unpacker. It is the best.
I do not believe Kaspersky leases its best unpacker to F-Secure and the other programs that use the KAV engine.
I have SystemSuite 4.0 and it uses the Trend AV engine, I believe. It is a sort of watered down version of Trend Micro, but is still an excellent backup AV, in my opinion.
KAVs weakness right now is its lack of stability on some XP machines, and it is Sllooowwww if you choose to monitor compressed files, which is a must as far as I'm concerned. F-Secure is slow too, but not as bad.
Even though KAVs AT abilities are as good as they come, I would still use a dedicated AT resident program such as TDS or TrojanHunter.
Security, to be effective, must be layered with backups.

 

>If I may put my two cents in. I believe the KAV engine
>in F-Secure is an older engine, not the latest version
>Kaspersky has.

Nope. Wrong. The KAV engine is included into the signatures. Every time you update your signatures you also update your whole engine. So the engine of FSAV and all other programs using the KAV engine ist the same ).

>The strength in Kaspersky mostly comes from two
>things. An excellent virus and trojan base, updated
>daily. The other strength is in KAVs unpacker. It is the
>best.

Nope - the unpacker of mc afee is more powerfull i think ).

>I do not believe Kaspersky leases its best unpacker to
>F-Secure and the other programs that use the KAV
>engine.

unpacking engine is also a part of the signatures, so FSAV has the same unpacking engine.

>F-Secure is slow too, but not as bad.

F-Secure is quite fast if you rememvber that it uses 2 and not only 1 engine ;o).

>Even though KAVs AT abilities are as good as they
>come, I would still use a dedicated AT resident
>program such as TDS or TrojanHunter.

I think it would be useless. As far as i remember KAV 4.0 for example also scans the process memory ).

I would choose FSAV. First you got 2 very good scan engines (f-prot with its amazing variant detection and heuristic abilities and kav with its amazing "all around detection rates").

Adieu, Andreas

 

Are you really sure about your statements? Even the forum admin said that KAV has better trojan detection than FSAV. So how could they use the same engine for detecting trojans?

And you are also claiming that FSAV has the same unpacking engine (which you say is included in the FSAV signatures).

And the engine in FSAV would be the same as in KAV?

Somehow it sounds too good to be true?!? Does anyone know any better?

BTW: Does FSAV scan process memory (like you said KAV does).

PS: I'm not trying to question your knowledge, but I just want to set things straight.

Best Wishes, Toni

 

Yes Andreas is right!

These files(engines,vs,code analyzer,unpackers and etc) are all the same(same size and update date) for KAV 4 and F-secure 5.xx:

avp.klb                
avp.set                
avp.vnd                
avp0204.avc            
backdoor.avc            
ca.avc                  
daily.avc              
eicar.avc              
elfbases.klc            
extr-cab.avc            
extract.avc
kernel.avc              
krndos.avc              
krnengn.avc
krnexe.avc              
krnjava.avc            
krnmacro.avc            
krnunp.avc              
macro.avc
mail.avc                
malware.avc            
patches.set
script.avc              
smart.avc              
trojan.avc              
unpack.avc              
up020308.avc            
up020316.avc            
up020322.avc            
up020329.avc            
up020405.avc            
up020412.avc            
up020419.avc            
up020503.avc      

So it is clear that F-Secure uses the latest engines from KAV.


Technodrome

 

Ok. So FSAV is starting to really sound like the ultimate choice. How about does FSAV "scan process memory" (like Andreas said KAV does)...?

Does FSAV have any kind of protection against MS Office viruses/trojans like KAV Personal Pro has OfficeGuard?

How about does FSAV have any kind of protection against viruses/worms which are transmitted through e-mail programs like Eudora etc...?

Best Wishes,
Toni

 

Yes if you got $125 bucks.....F-Secure scans memory at every start-up or once a manual scan has been lunched.

F-Secure fully protects you from MS Office virus/Trojan but there is no feature like Office Guard.

If you try to open infected attachment F-Secure will alert you about possible infection, so you are covered there as well.

Technodrome

 

Doh! I screwed up the posting above. It can be deleted.

---> "Yes if you got $125 bucks.....F-Secure scans memory at every start-up or once a manual scan has been lunched."

Kaspersky Anti-Virus is even more expensive (for Personal Pro). You will have to pay 99,95USD (for 1 year / 1 user) if I have understood correctly.

And F-Secure Antivirus is 80USD for one user license which will last for ever I think.

So FSAV really isn't that expensive compared to KAV.

---

Do you think (and everyone else as well) that FSAV is the best antivirus program (if NOD32 isn't counted in)...?

Best Wishes,
Toni Paavola

 

F-Secure is one of the best( so is KAV, NOD32,DrWeb32, CSAV, F-Prot, NOrton and AVK).... There is no the best AV program...


Technodrome

 

Interesting! However it is also confusing.
For instance, the latest version of KAV is 4.??. I can use any version from 3.5 up and get the same update files. Does this mean there is no difference in the engine itself between all those versions? The only changes have been cosmetic?
Also, I use F-Secure and the AVP version is listed as 3.55.160.3210.
As for speed, 3.5 scanned much faster for me than any of the version 4s did. F-Secure is faster for me than KAV 4.0, but I have a very slow response in loading Powerdesk if I have scan compressed files checked in the monitor settings. For some reason or another, if I use Windows explorer, it opens much quicker.
I don't claim to be an expert, I just go by my experiences and the experience of others. I think I'll stick with F-Secure with TDS for the time being. I'm not having resource problems, so it seems like a good combination to me.

 

Yes you can and there is no difference!

F-Secure + TDS = great choice. (although F-Secure is capable of detecting large number of Trojans and Backdoors)

Technodrome

 

KAV 4 has some more features than 3.5. Also the engine of KAV 4 was fully rewritten. So KAV 4 is no 'cosmetic' update. There is a difference but at the moment this difference does not concern the detection rate.

wizard