I've been using linux around 18 months and in that time I've always used Klamav (on demand only) or F-prot or nothing. I prefer using something gui based and klamav is nice to use but after some reading I've noticed that clamav's detection rates in various different types of tests is pretty bad (klamav is just a front-end for clamav, as you may have guessed). On top of this, I installed the clamav tests viruses and on suse it missed 2 of them the first time I tried it and 3 of them the next. On kanotix it also missed 2 of them but not the same ones as on suse. The fact this happened tends to make me believe there is a flaw in the program itself. I know these tests aren't the be all and end all but even still I'm looking for something else. On windows I used to swear by avast and also sometimes used antivir. Do their linux versions use the same engine and are they at all reliable? I haven't really read up on antivirus programs on linux so I don't know if there are major differences to how they work on windows. I have read various articles and forum posts about avg on linux and there seems to mixed opinions about it, some people say it's great and others say it's buggy won't update. So basically, what I want to know is is Klamav/clamav really that bad and how does it compare to avg/avast/antivir?