Recommendation for Silent but effective combo?

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by anoose, Nov 15, 2011.

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

    anoose Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2011
    Posts:
    5
    Hello guys,

    I am looking for a combo that is free, silent and also effective. I do not want any effects on my computer performance. I previously used CIS and Avast Free with Free Sandboxie, but it felt like it was hurting my computer performance. So I deleted these two software and looking to see what else I could use. I currently have UAC, SUA, SRP and EMET. Windows defender disabled and using free sandboxie. I will greatly appreciate any suggestions. Thank you
     
  2. kjdemuth

    kjdemuth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Posts:
    2,960
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Private firewall, panda cloud and sandboxie free.
     
  3. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Sandboxie. EMET. Configure your browser properly with adblock.

    That's all you need and it'll never raise a peep.
     
  4. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    It looks as though you have enough already for a quiet and secure setup. All you need now, if you haven't got it already, is an image/restore scheme. You can find some good suggestions and tutorials on free products here.
     
  5. ams963

    ams963 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Posts:
    5,965
    Location:
    Parallel Universe
    norton dns + sandboxie + panda cloud av + private firewall + malwarebytes antimalware + keyscrambler personal + hitman pro + secunia psi + macrium reflect

    and hopefully you'll get the desired combo..;)
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2011
  6. PJC

    PJC Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,959
    Location:
    Internet
    Norton DNS or Comodo DNS
    BTW, what's your Browser?
     
  7. blacknight

    blacknight Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,434
    Location:
    Europe
    " Silent " applications and best security don't walk together. :D
     
  8. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    I disagree blacknight.

    I think silent will always be more secure.
     
  9. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Care to expand on that thought.
     
  10. ocsi

    ocsi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Posts:
    95
    Panda Cloud Antivirus Free (or Avast! Free) + Malware Defender + Windows Firewall.
    Sandboxie and/or Shadow Defender.
     
  11. moontan

    moontan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2010
    Posts:
    3,931
    Location:
    Québec
    if the user does not have to make a decision then he/she can't make a mistake.
    it's a good concept as long as the security is up to the task.

    personally, i'd rather not have to manage and babysit security apps.
    the less i have to deal with this stuff the better.
    it leaves me times for more important things.
     
  12. HKEY1952

    HKEY1952 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Posts:
    648
    Location:
    HKEY/SECURITY/ (value not set)
    I second that :thumb:


    HKEY1952
     
  13. Dark Shadow

    Dark Shadow Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Posts:
    4,553
    Location:
    USA
    I agree, thats why I like security with no yes, No, maybe,Not sure,click it out of my way.
     
  14. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    If the application is asking the user what to do... or if the user ever gets involved with the security... it's an issue.

    Users will almost always make the wrong decisions. Even an experienced user will have a slip up once in a while.

    MS's own statistics show that almost all Windows infections are caused by the user. Clearly the user needs to stay away from critical components like security.
     
  15. 1chaoticadult

    1chaoticadult Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Posts:
    2,248
    Location:
    Chaotic Land
    I think you should change users to average users in all of your statements. I have never slipped up when it comes my security or made a wrong decision, maybe you have but I haven't. I prefer being involved with and in control of the security of my system don't see an issue there.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2011
  16. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Certainly it goes double for average users. But no one is immune to social engineering. No, not everyone will get infected. Yes, if you practice safe browsing you are far less likely to run into malware.

    That changes nothing. The user is still always going to be the weakest link.
     
  17. 1chaoticadult

    1chaoticadult Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Posts:
    2,248
    Location:
    Chaotic Land
    Hungry again there you are putting all users in the same category. If I'm the weakest link why I haven't had any malware, virus, etc. on any computer I have owned for many many years (so long I can't count). Also why haven't I been affected by social engineering?
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2011
  18. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Like I said, not everyone is going to get infected in their life. Not everyone is even going to run into malware. I'd bet the majority of users never visit an exploit page or malicious site even once in their life.

    I also assume you keep things up to date.

    But yes, it's almost always the case according to MS. According to Google it's almost always exploits though the two are not mutually exclusive (Trick someone into going to an exploit page.)

    Anyway, when you look at an application your mind runs through a list. Is it from a known source? Is it certified? blahblah blah some people have better longer lists than others. Essentially it's heuristics - guessing. And it's poor heuristics at that considering that our brains aren't capable of file emulation/ analysis or running through generic signatures - the best we can do is go by what we see and that's horribly inefficient.

    Sorry, but the user is absolutely the weakest link. Always has been and always will be.

    Any product that relies on a user is going to fail in a million different situations because cert hacks happen, 0days happen, site hacks happen.

    What if my account were hacked and I was like "Hey I just found this great security program." I link you to a legitimate site that's been hacked (not to your knowledge) and you download the payload, which is certified.

    But then, all of a sudden UAC goes wild and your HIPS bursts with popups!

    "Oh, it's cool. Hungry Man told me it was legit and I've heard of the site/ product and it's even certified."

    Suddenly you trust it. Your programs are telling you it's malware but they're not really telling you they're asking you... and that's the problem.
     
  19. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    And, of course, that's not going into the fact that if the cert were trusted by an application like CIS it would simply bypass everything. But that's another issue entirely - still, it shows that the system of trust is broken.
     
  20. moontan

    moontan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2010
    Posts:
    3,931
    Location:
    Québec
    then maybe you should switch to a stronger ale. :p
     
  21. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    @Moontan, actually, that's really quite true haha I can't tell you how different situations will really lower your guard. That applies to compsec or anything else really.

    Maybe it's a late night, just finished studying, and you trip up. Software is supposed to be there to catch you - but if it's loud HIPS relying on the user... it's all on you.

    User interaction should only ever be superfluous.
     
  22. 1chaoticadult

    1chaoticadult Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Posts:
    2,248
    Location:
    Chaotic Land
    I don't care what MS nor Google says. I'm basing my statements on my personal experience not on some data collected by a corporation. Since you mentioned this example, I've already had several like this in the past and guess what I didn't click the link. Guess why, not because of some software but because of what, me identifying the link as malicious. If I was the weakest link, I would have been infected several times over so again your statement doesn't apply to me. Moving on...

    And maybe you should be concerned with your own security situation.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2011
  23. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
    i like to be incontrol of my system at least what is going on in my own destop,dont like sneaky proceses at all;)
     
  24. 1chaoticadult

    1chaoticadult Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Posts:
    2,248
    Location:
    Chaotic Land
    Same here J. I like control of my system as well. :thumb:
     
  25. moontan

    moontan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2010
    Posts:
    3,931
    Location:
    Québec
    eh m8, where's your sense of humour?

    drop the attitude, please. :cautious:
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.