question re: panda

Discussion in 'other security issues & news' started by davlam, Apr 16, 2006.

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

    davlam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Posts:
    11
    this question is not for me as such as i use Bit Def and also have spywareblaster and regularly run adaware/spybot s&d and use mailwasher as a mail filter.

    However, the question has come op thus :

    If panda (anitvirus and antispyware) is installed are the others necessary or is panda more than capable of covering everything that those other apps would do also.

    Many people that i know who run panda have nothing else on their system (no additional firewall or antimalware or anything). Your thoughts/comments on all of that greatly appreciated.

    cheers,

    dave
     
  2. gerardwil

    gerardwil Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Posts:
    4,748
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    This might be a good starting point:

    Malware Prevention

    But travel around here at Wilders you will find a lot more good advices as well.

    Gerard
     
  3. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,698
    Hello,
    What's the level of expertise / habits of the persons involved?
    Mrk
     
  4. davlam

    davlam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Posts:
    11
    basic to aware in terms of experitse and i'd say general browsing (no p2p or large downloading etc)


    there are a group of individuals in the forum i frequent who think that panda is the one and only, the best in the business and will protect them from all and they never need to worry about anything.

    My question to them is that if they don't have any layered and alternative security how in heavens name do they know what panda doesn't catch (this being said for any 'package')

    But the reply is resounding and i can't seem to educate them in the fact that no one thing is the dogs doo dahs.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.