Online Armor vs Safe`N`Sec, please help-me to make my security suite!

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by RefJuf, Aug 27, 2005.

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

    RefJuf Guest

    What combination should I make? PG+RegDefend+OnlineArmor or PG+Regdefend+Safe`N`Sec
     
  2. Tassie_Devils

    Tassie_Devils Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2002
    Posts:
    2,514
    Location:
    State Queensland, Australia
    Hi RefJuf :)

    I have not tried Safe 'N' Sec, so cannot commmet.

    I have tried/use OnlineArmor and love it. VERY good support when it was in Beta stage [and still is :D :D ] and it's working a treat here. There were some issues early on [naturally, it was a Beta] but 99% of those have been resolved and rest being worked on by Mike Nash and his team at TALL EMU

    Only advice, trial both, as it's entirely up to you in the long run as what will work on your system. ;)

    Cheers, TAS
     
  3. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    Hi RefJuf,

    I would start of slowly and see what you like. There is too much overlap, I think, between Online Armor, Safe N' Sec, and ProcessGuard. If you like to have more control over your executables and what they are doing, I would start with ProcessGuard and see if you like it. If you prefer less transparancy and more automation, then I would start with Online Armor (my preference is Online Armore over Safe N' Sec).

    Once you have decided on which anti-executable you want, then the question is whether you want RegDefend for registry protection. Online Armor will eventually have Registry protection but it doesn't have it now. Ditto ProcessGuard. But Safe N' Secure probably has enough for you now, though RegDefend has more extensibility (you can add Tony's and Kents definitions).

    BTW, I have ProcessGuard + RegDefend right now, full-time. Online Armor is excellent and I am trialing it, but I am not sure yet whether I really need the overlap with ProcessGuard. Online Armor does provide additional defense over and above PG+RD.

    I would recommend that you take it slow and easy. You may change your mind as you become more familiar with these products.

    Hope this helps,
    Rich
     
  4. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,057
    I am actually running all 4, Regdefend, ProcessGuard, Online Armor, and Safe'n'Sec. Only thing that makes a valid comparison somewhat difficult is the fact that the version of Safe'n'Sec I am running is a non public beta. Honestly I lilke all 4 of them.

    They all overlap do overlap, but one thing I like is there is more than one chance to catch things. Sometimes it is easy to okay something the first time, and then wonder if I should have. 2nd chance is handy.

    Also comparing SnS with OA each one of them is doing some unique things that provide surfing protection. Online Armor is great about catching Active X stuff. I can turn it on in IE and not worry about Active X. Also it's antiphishing feature is also great and works.

    The SnS beta catches some frame and windows stuff in IE, that you might not normally see. I could permenantly okay this action and wouldn't be bothered but I like knowing what is going on.

    For me it's not a choice, but running all of them. They are coexisting very happily on my machine.

    Pete
     
  5. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Resource usage may be a consideration. I don't use either one YET. But at least one poster at Wilder's reported that OA was resource heavy compared to SafeNsec on his machine.
     
  6. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    The Hammer,

    I have had both installed on my machine for some testing. OA is a little heavier than the current release of SnS, but not inordinately so. Clearly not enough on my machine for it to be a deciding factor. I noticed mainly when I used WindowWasher in cleaning out things - it did slow that down quite perceptibly. In ordinary use the slowdown seemed very modest.

    As Peter notes, OA does a great job with Active-X material. In my case I really want to minimize the family needing to answer pop-ups and prefer SnS's somewhat more parsimonious approach, so I'm staying with SnS, am looking forward to the version now in beta, but I'm also keeping an eye on OA. Both are solid applications with somewhat different slants on things.

    Cost-in-use, at current prices, is neutral at three years with continual updates. The key difference, if you do not maintain a current license, is that OA will continue work, while SnS will not without a current activation key. Since I plan to stay current if I use the product, that doesn't matter to me, but I could see that it would to some.

    Blue
     
  7. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,057
    Resource use is an interesting issue. Personally with 1Gig of Ram I don't bother looking at actually memory use. 10K or 15K difference doesn't matter. But there are things I do on my computer day in and day out and I know how it feels, and I can tell when something is loading it down. Also times are changing.

    When Process Guard came out I began to realize why run TDS's execution protection. Did I need to worry about some new program having a trojan in it if it couldn't run. (Note if I downloaded some exe I wasn't sure of I'd scan it first). Now as I look at the job the four programs I mentioned are doing together, I've cut back on scanning type stuff. Although I have both Counterspy and Spysweeper, no real time scanning. I have also cut back on the degree of scanning KAV 5.0 does. (Note I do have both a router and Outpost 2.7) The result is with these 4 programs and less scanning in real time, my machine is actually running faster.

    Pete

    PS. I do realize this might not be the best approach for the casual mom and pop user.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.