How efficient is your security setup? (comparative contest)

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by Kees1958, Feb 5, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    How demanding is your security setup (in Windows) when browsing the internet for one hour?

    Here is the comparison contest outline:

    1. Make a screen print showing all applications
    a) selecting show all users
    b) showing white space below (indicating it is a complete list)
    c) having browsed the internet for one hour (explorer has to be active for at least one hour), you can cheat I know, but hey grow up, it is not a real contest where you can win a price :p

    2) Mark your security aps and total cpu time and ram usage
    (in my example attached below it is 4 secs total CPU and 48.484 KB=48MB, notice that those aps haven only read 100MB from disk and written less than 4 MB, so very little disk overhead)

    3) Explain why you use it. example
    a) GeSWall Pro with all notifications off, auto kill and protection on high (= no pop-ups and browsers only allowed to write to D:\Downloads directory, plus virtualising regsitry access in HKU)
    b) MalWare Defender process + network protection (only Shutdown, low level registry and keyboard access, direct disk/phisical memory ad protect kernelobjects = absolutely quiet) 2nd line
    c) Avast standard shield to check new arrivals (althoug GW paralisses malware in the policy sandbox, I feel responsible for not spreading malware, therefore a check on new arrivals with a traditional Anti Virus, that is the only reason for not going "naked")


    Cheers Kees
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 5, 2009
  2. Sully

    Sully Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2005
    Posts:
    3,719
    I think you should do this from a fresh boot? Also, do you not want to see the peak mem usage and vm size?

    I like this idea. Not sure exactly if it shows real world information or not as to how 'heavy or light' a security setup is. But I will do this tonight because I find it interesting.

    Sul.

    EDIT: Also, are you suggesting to include the browser in the list of marked processes?
     
  3. n8chavez

    n8chavez Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Posts:
    2,302
    Location:
    Location Unknown
    Here's mine...light as a feather.
     

    Attached Files:

    • mine.png
      mine.png
      File size:
      53.9 KB
      Views:
      1,607
  4. 3xist

    3xist Guest

    How demanding is your security setup (in Windows) when browsing the internet for one hour?


    Comodo Internet Security 3.8 Beta 2, Which includes everything:
    Firewall - Safe Mode.
    Defense+ - Safe Mode & Proactive Security
    Antivirus - Heuristics set to High.
    Memory Firewall - Enabled.
    ThreatCast. - Enabled

    Only 2 Processes:
    cfp.exe (GUI)
    cmdagent.exe (Heart of the Suite)

    Total Memory Usage: 4,072K

    Cheers,
    Josh
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 5, 2009
  5. chris2busy

    chris2busy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Posts:
    477
    and here is mine..
    at the moment just sbie,LUA,SRP..cannot possibly go any lighter..
    explorer.exe is a little high but thats from dwm(desktop windows managment-a.k.a aero engine) but its not impacting me in the least bit since i have dwm.exe using only 1 out of my Q6600's 4 cores..sbie for scripts/cookies/privacy(read only to data partitions) and the rest is for everything else..the best performance/security combo for my routine/fun activities.Might add vista firewall control in the future,but i think i'll wait for the next OA release (that network monitor of theirs has got me super addicted-not just that ofc).
     

    Attached Files:

  6. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    That is a problem with Chrome, because each tabs gets its own statistics, so when you close a tab that time is gone
     
  7. _kronos_

    _kronos_ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Posts:
    126
    As you can see in my signature the config used is:
    LUA, SRP, RealTimeDefender (red), PrevxEdge Free (blu)

    imho this is the lighter and securer config;) :D

    EDIT:
    changed the attachment, added CPU Time column in taskmgr.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 6, 2009
  8. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    @ Kronos,

    You should also select the column total CPU time. To get an idea of how much CPU cycles they steal.

    Securer: I don't know SRP on XP can be circumvaded
     
  9. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
    Since i already posted it elsewhere:

    5 hours running (surfing mostly). (i am the only user).

    Explorer.exe at 01:51

    4.png



    Unfortunately one can only compare for his own CPU, because in a quad core, what appears 1 minute on my dual core, will appear much less on his.

    But i find this thread educating, so maybe users will start looking at CPU Time too and not just "RAM" nowdays, before saying which application is "lighter".

    More applications eating cpu cycles in the CPU, even at low levels, the less snappy all system is. Specially in single core CPUs. That's why Intel had multithreaded CPUs in single cores in the P4 era. Even if your total CPU usage is low, having higher CPU cycles, mean that at the same time more applications will occupy CPY cycles and without process prioritizing, it will all be less snappy.

    My most efficient and secure setup, though is Twister + Comodo.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2009
  10. _kronos_

    _kronos_ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Posts:
    126
    Sorry, post edited:D
    I improved my SRP filetypes according to this 3d...

    I assume that using goodsense, alternative browser (FF or Opera), good hips (as RTD), an anti-something in realtime, Limited User, SRP, you should be better protected than a normal configuration as AV + FRW...:p
    Finally users experience is unquestionable (till now not a single malware passed in a lots of months of usage).

    p.s.:sorry for my bad english:)
     
  11. erreale

    erreale Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Posts:
    22
    My system XP Sp3


    Red: My ISR program (Eaz-Fix)
    Green: Antivir
    Blue: CIS (full install)
     

    Attached Files:

  12. Franklin

    Franklin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,517
    Location:
    West Aussie
    OK fellas, if you hit the Mem Usage tab in Taskmanager it will toggle from highest to lowest or lowest to highest making it easier to read.:mad:

    TM.jpg
     
  13. jdd58

    jdd58 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Posts:
    525
    Location:
    Arizona
    tskmgr3.gif

    AppGuard and Sandboxie for isolation.

    Prevx free for detection. A2 free for a deeper right click scan of archives than prevx.

    RUBotted for fun. I thought it would sit idle but it has provided some alerts, (detected dns query of malicious domain).

    Zero cpu, low memory, few disk reads and writes.
     
  14. TechOutsider

    TechOutsider Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    Posts:
    549
    My computer was on for all over 90 minutes. Just that I didn't record explorer's CPU time all the time. And I have three instances of Symantec Service Framework running; had to log off of my Guest account and head to the Admin. account to capture all the processes.
     

    Attached Files:

  15. alex_s

    alex_s Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Posts:
    1,251
    Just a note. Memory usage says nothing without virtual memory usage. A simple trick with SetProcessWorkingSetSize API can show you in TM any memory usage you wish.
     
  16. bman412

    bman412 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Posts:
    261
    After roughly 5 hours of multitasking including a game wherein the client loads a bunch of files into memory and scanned by avast! standard shield set at default scan. Sandboxie with Drop Rights enabled handles browsers and messengers with a default download location set as Forced Folder on a separate sandbox with no internet access. Only one sandbox has disabled Drop Rights for occational software installs and has no internet access as well.

    Shadow Defender set always on with some folder exclusions. Thinking of adding Process Guard or some sort of antiexecutable although it might just be overhead.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,632
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    Nice Topic and informative, but..................

    Can anyone tell exactly what files that guide the API which initiates the kepboard print screen?

    And is this even possible at all?

    Easter
     
  18. simmikie

    simmikie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Posts:
    321

    good golly miss molly, that's a bunch of lightness from that one very crammed app! impressive.


    Mike
     
  19. 3xist

    3xist Guest

    Yes I know... Lot's of stuff in the suite while keeping minimal RAM. :) But as always, everyone is different.

    Cheers,
    Josh
     
  20. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    What about its total CPU time consumption (and disk I/O, because that is the slowest part of many systems). RAM was more an issue when XP was launched

    Latest setup with Avira9, now in 1 hour browsing only 3 secs total CPU time of mu security aps, plus 2 secs disk I/O (100MB, I have avg 60MB disk I/O throughput), so maximum of 5 secs on 1 hour is 5 secs on 3600 secs is less than 0,2% of my system load
     

    Attached Files:

    • 3.JPG
      3.JPG
      File size:
      123.4 KB
      Views:
      5
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2009
  21. tomazyk

    tomazyk Guest

    After browsing for an hour using only System safety monitor:
     

    Attached Files:

  22. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    Wow impressive, what's your CPU? (just for reference)?
     
  23. chris2busy

    chris2busy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Posts:
    477
    Is that vista skin on XP ?Because i thought SSM didn't work on vista :Oo_O
     
  24. tomazyk

    tomazyk Guest

    It's nothing special: Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz. The I/O Read/Write bytes are not correct. I think SSM uses some protection rootkit-like components so Windows can't get performance data right.
     
  25. tomazyk

    tomazyk Guest

    Yes it is only a Vista theme on Windows XP. I'm using it with pached uxtheme.dll.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.