Safe'N'Sec Review

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by SDS909, Mar 15, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SDS909

    SDS909 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Posts:
    333
  2. solarpowered candle

    solarpowered candle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    1,181
    Location:
    new zealand
    SDS whats the diffirence between Safensec beta and safensec and antivirus beta thanks
     
  3. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    SnS with antivirus has an integrated on-demand AV scanner included (Bitdefender). In keeping with the design philosophy of the program, adjustment of the AV scanner settings are very broad and split into 3 prepackaged levels (Partial, Strict, and Full - descriptions are scan [executables and files changes since last database update], [executables and potentally infectable files with no scanning or mail databases or archives], and [files and archives, executables, and mail databases], respectively).

    Blue
     
  4. Stephanos G.

    Stephanos G. Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Posts:
    720
    Location:
    Cyprus
    Two questions:
    1. Any conflict between SnS and LnS (LooknStop)?
    2. Can i use SnS with antivirus and NOD32?

    Thanks
     
  5. SDS909

    SDS909 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Posts:
    333
    1) There shouldn't be.
    2) Yes, SNS-AV only is on-demand AV. Great compliment to normal AV.
     
  6. Stephanos G.

    Stephanos G. Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Posts:
    720
    Location:
    Cyprus
  7. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    Stephanos G.,

    I can confirm that SNS-AV and NOD32 coexist fine, at least they do on my machine. No problems at all. You will notice that the scan appears somewhat slow if AMON is active since you are effectively running two scans in parallel.

    Blue
     
  8. solarpowered candle

    solarpowered candle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    1,181
    Location:
    new zealand
    when is the beta available?. I emailed them and they said that its not available just yet?
     
  9. SDS909

    SDS909 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Posts:
    333
    Just fill out the form, and sit back. I think in about a week.
     
  10. hendrix

    hendrix Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    39
    Hi! This is my first post. Does anyone know if SNS works with Zone Alarm Pro?

    For what it's worth: I am running XP with Norton AV 2004 (am thinking of swithching to NOD32), and I use Zone Alarm Pro, Trojan Hunter, Spy Sweeper, Microsoft Antispyware, Spybot, Adaware, Spyware Blaster, and Registry Mechanic. I use Firefox for my browser.

    -Hendrix
     
  11. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

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

    The last time I tried about a month ago, it was not working. I was told it was because of a conflict with ZoneAlarm.

    Rich
     
  12. hendrix

    hendrix Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    39
    Thanks Rich for the info.
    -Hendrix
     
  13. SDS909

    SDS909 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Posts:
    333
    That is absolute overkill, you are taking this all too far!

    A good AV/AT + Backend Product (Like SNS), and browsing with Firefox is all most people will ever need. Running 10 security apps for the average joe is insanity my friend.
     
  14. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    Hi SDS909 and Hendrix,

    It doesn't seem like too much of an overkill compared to what others are doing on this forum:

    1) Norton AV definitely needs some layered backup security which is being provided by ...
    2) TrojanHunter and either MS AS or SpySweeper (one in real-time and one on-demand)
    3) ZoneAlarm Pro as a sw firewall is very common in combination with an AV and an AT
    4) Spywareblaster, Ad-aware, and Spybot as backup preventative and/or on-demand scannering is also very common. They probably catch very little, but there certainly is no harm in running them once in a while. I have found that Ad-ware will detect some nuisance here and there somtimes that seeps through the other products.

    With pro-active prevention, the chances that any of the layered programs will actually catch something is greatly diminished, but even so, products such as SnS are still new and I would not remove layered protection until the product's capabilities are proven.

    Rich
     
  15. SDS909

    SDS909 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Posts:
    333
    I wouldn't use this forum as a reference, we have a niche group of paranoid people around here.

    As such, common sense is your best protection. Remember, SNS has BitDefender on-demand scanner, so effectively it is a second AV/AT product.

    I use Dr.Web and SNS exclusively, along with a Hardware Firewall, and to this day i've never actually been infected. There really isn't a reason for it. Again, common sense is the best protection.. I've run systems without any protection for months and months with no issues.

    I hardly think the average joe needs 14 security products installed. That is just taking it all a bit too far and becoming overly obsessive about things. But hey, to each his own!
     
  16. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    Ho SDS909,

    My two friends who were badly infected with trojans and keylogger(s) in the last couple of weeks would have agreed with you three weeks ago. Nowadays, they have a completely different perspective. Times change and people learn. Murphy's Law. It is a simple matter to run three or four good products to protect oneself. It is an entirely different matter to recover from indentity and financial theft.

    Some may call reasonable security "paranoid" - others may call it "prudent". Some may call leaving vulnerabilities in place "reasonable", others might call it "reckless". Some may call installing a product like SnS fairly reckless, because it has very little history, others might call it asute. Personally, I don't like calling anything, anything. I just like answering questions to the best of my ability and with my perspective in mind.

    Rich
     
  17. wings

    wings Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2004
    Posts:
    53
    Yes, I start to believe that too sometimes, especially when I look at what richrf is doing.

    Personally I don't understand why people who are so paranoid continue to spend all that money on all these products (ok, ok, some are free, but let's be honest, that free stuff isn't all that good), instead of focusing on the core problems.

    You can buy a cheap 2nd hand PC (I bought a 1GHz last time for $100) and use it as internet PC and do the serious work on the main PC. There are also lots of ways to make a secure connection between the two. Actually something simple as a using a non-tcpip protocol between the two PCs is already enough to stop the internet nasties and all you need is a good virus scanner like KAV. Let's be honest, do you really want to have your personal info on a PC that connects directly to the internet?

    Btw, you always have the option to go for more secure systems like Apple or Linux. So for the paranoid there are lots of options, but installing 10-15 security programs... isn't that like carrying water to the sea? Well, it sure makes the manufacturers of all these security products happy to have paranoid people like some of you, I can tell you that ;)
     
  18. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    George Bernard Shaw once said:

    "When you criticize others, you are writing your own autobiography".

    Rich
     
  19. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    For those who are interested in my current setup, it is very simple and I believe to be very secure - much simplier than moving back and forth between two unsecure computers:

    1) Kav 5.0 Pro anti-malware (latest release)
    2) Ewido anti-malware (backup for KAV)
    3) ProcessGuard (prevent unauthorized executables, rootkits, keyloggers, etc.)
    4) RegDefend (prevent unauthorized registry entries)
    5) WormGuard (prevent unauthorized scripts)
    6) ZoneAlarm Pro (firewall)
    7) Terabyte Unlimited Image for DOS (my failsafe image copy backup)

    Simple and sweet. :)

    Rich
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2005
  20. Starrob

    Starrob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Posts:
    493

    To each their own. Everyone has different requirements both in life and in their computer needs. Many people try to force their own view on everyone else and it usually is not necesarry and most of the time unwanted.

    I look at a lot of people's posts in many different forums and many people write with the tone of "All those not using my solution are idiots". I think in most cases that type of attitude just makes people combatitive rather than wanting to seriously look at another persons solution, for who wants to be called a idiot implied or otherwise?

    Usually it is just best to put your solution out there and let others take it or leave it rather than imply that others might be dumb for not doing things your way.

    I am not going to get into specifics but in my case your solution does not apply to me because of my unique situation, I am unable to do exactly as you do and even if I could do exactly as you do, I wouldn't because I follow my own path. I learn more by doing my own thing and making my own mistakes.

    You should allow others to make their own mistakes. There are some on this board that will load up their computer with security software and that is their path. It may be that so much security software is necesarry for them or it maybe that a person is trying many things out to find the best solution for them. Maybe in 6 months, a person will discover that your set-up is the best solution for them and they might dump all their security software....well, it was a learning experience for them. They might have learned things about their computer by using some of that software that they might not have known by reading these threads or some dry text out of a book.



    Starrob
     
  21. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Hi wings

    Your solution is great....for you. But like others have said, doesn't work for everyone, and wouldn't work for me. First problem, is I physically don't have room for the extra computer, plus the serious work I do is my business, and part of it requires keeping the "serious" computer online most of the day. Ergo I run a setup simliar to Richf plus since I do have a business notebook on a wireless network as part of the setup, I had to nail that down also. Paranoid maybe, but I can't afford to take the risk, and so far I haven't had any problems.

    Pete
     
  22. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

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

    Yes, I concur with Starrob and Peter. Each person's situation is different and therefore comes up with their own unique solution. And they should be permitted to discuss their situation freely - i.e. without any unnecessary and totally unhelpful labeling and name-calling.

    If another forum member has an alternative solution, it is certainly welcomed and the solution should be described fully so that other forum members can appreciate it. If someone wants to suggest that people should be using alternative operating systems and cheap computers, with alternative network protocols, then this recommendation can certainly be set-forth with referring to other forum members as paranoid, stupid, or whatever. I have not idea how name-calling and labeling adds to the recommendation or description.

    In any case, thanks for your comments guys. We see things in the same way which is probably why we are able to talk to each other over this forum. :)

    Rich
     
  23. Notok

    Notok Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    Portland, OR (USA)
    Fred Langa just wrote an excellent article on the subject, here:
    http://www.langa.com/newsletters/2005/2005-06-27.htm#2

    You may also want to take a look at the bottom of the main page at how many registered members are here, and how many more guests are here at any given moment, before declaring a couple members making noise fully representative of the climate here. Yes, Wilders has it's share of paranoiacs, but there are plenty of others that are not. Some of the ones in the "not" catagory may even have similar setups for their own reasons as well, with full cognizance and without paranoia, but you never know.

    Taking the high road is rarely productive in these situations. Providing level-headed reason (rather than flame fueled rants) generally is, however, and does more for keeping you from looking like a jerk in the process. ;)
     
  24. Paranoid2000

    Paranoid2000 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Posts:
    2,839
    Location:
    North West, United Kingdom
    Connecting to the Internet indirectly does not offer any significant security advantages compared to a direct connection, whether using TCP/IP or not. Your browser can still be hijacked and your downloads can still contain malware. The only "benefit" is that websites you visit will see your gateway's address rather than your main computer's address and this is a (small) privacy benefit.

    Avoiding TCP/IP would make your main system immune to its protocol-level exploits but in general these are used by crackers to take down servers - home users are not an attractive target for such attacks when a browser hijack or malware/adware install can be more profitable. Running KAV is a far more sensible option but adding a security solution that does not rely on signatures of known malware (like a firewall or process monitor) is a sensible backup.
    10-15 is almost surely overkill - but most of the examples listed here are far more reasonable. Windows security does have several areas which each need addressing (browser security, Windows scripting, network access, registry access) so using "best of breed" solutions for each area provides a better overall solution.

    The one area not so far addressed is that of web filtering. A good web-filter (Proxomitron being the most powerful since it can also filter HTTPS traffic - see the Dangers of HTTPS thread for more on this) should remove the need for any anti-spyware scanners.
     
  25. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Running a setup like Richf might seem like overkill(mine is very similar). But once you have worked on an infected computer your perspective changes quickly. I chose overkill easily over the cleanup.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.