Security Suites vs 3rd Party Applications

A questoin for our members??
In your opinion are security suites better protection than installing indvidual applications such as firewalls....anti-virus.....spyware etc etc...... I have been advise to use a security suite over the latter as individual applications can be neutralized by malicous applicationsw etc...etc........ Appreciate a feed back on this??

 

Re: Security Stuies vs 3rd Party Applications

Ihave tried suites in the past.Norton,Mcafee,Zonealarm and few others.Iwill stay with stand alone apps,they provide far better protection IMO. The trick is to find what work well on your system.

 

Re: Security Stuies vs 3rd Party Applications

my 0.02
both can be disabled just as easily by the "correct" malware. but you have a better shot with more applications because one could be "immune" to the termination technique used by that malware (others might not even have self protection so those are dead to begin with if the malware looks for their executables)

on the other hand:
-security suite reduce the number of processes and icons in you system tray and are easier to manage because everything is in one place.
-some use less resources as the combination of AV+FW+AS
-you minimize conflicts that might occur.

 

Re: Security Stuies vs 3rd Party Applications

I'd go with individual apps everyday of the week!

I have tried loads of suites, and the only one I found which did everything I wanted was the new F-Secure 2007 suite. It is great, but the problem is it added a two - three second delay to everything I did on my PC, which I couldn't live with.

My current set up is very light, secure, and it is adaptable. I have SUPERantispyware looking after the spyware (etc), Antivir looks after viruses, and Safe n Sec fills the gaps, and looks after everything else...

If I want to add to my set up or change something, I can do so without having to ditch the whole lot. With a suite you are stuck with what you've got! Plus I usually find I do not need half the stuff bundled into suites these days...

 

Present day secuity suites are vastly improved compared to their prior incarnations. For example, Kaspersky Internet Suite always had one of the best AntiVirus (its namesake), but a weak Firewall. It's Firewall (AntiHacker) has now been enhanced to where it is now very good. Another example is ZoneAlarm Security Suite which always had an excellent FW (its namesake), but a mediocre AV. As of version 7, ZASS switched to the Kaspersky AV and in so doing, shored-up its previous weakness.

The above mentioned security suites also include additional integrated protection such as AntiSpyware and AntiSpam. Last but not least, there's the synergy element, so there's no concern about conflicting security progams (as previously mentioned)! Imho security suites are now well worth considering, especially for those who are less technically inclined.

 

Yes, for beginners and geeks, who prefers to be comfortable. But only really good one is KIS.
Plantextract already said it all, it is only up to you to decide, what you are really looking for.

 

As a FYI regarding "Suites":
http://superantispyware.blogspot.com/2006/11/are-suites-really-sweet.html

 

My opinion is much like plantextract's, but my personal preference is for suites. I do feel there is less risk of conflicts, and it makes life a lot easier, having everything under one roof, so to speak. The latest suites seem to be improving all the time, and unless you are dedicated to using freeware, I think it's cheaper to purchase a complete suite, rather than individual products, given that AV, Firewall and Anti-Spyware, at least, are required, averaging out at around £20 per component, whereas the suites probably come in at an average cost of about £35-£40 all in, and that includes Anti-Spam, plus other bells and whistles.

 

another vote for mix and match
the topology of a suite is easy to map, and an automated tool to subvert it can be crafted, mix and match is harder, toss in realtime checksums of security aps, and logging \ auditing and there is a higher probability of catching it.

Of course the real nasty rootkits may well still defeat that strategy.

So back to the same old song
Virtualize the attack vectors
&
Separate the OS from data and restore it it a known secure state at the slightest "feeling" of something wrong, maybe even as a regular preventative measure

 

As you can see my preference is for mix and match to gain hopefully best of breed. Many IT guys have many choices for each piece and good reasons (usually) for why those choices were made.

If you are NOT able or willing to do the research to develop your choices then you can:

1) Not do it, and pick a suite a good one of course, but it will NOT be perfect
2) Copy the choices of an IT guy you know and respect
3) Get behind a router, grab Antivir and a free Firewall and forget the problem

Much depends on what risks you take on the internet.

 

I also prefer separate components. Suites can be crashed or neutralized as easily as a single component can. Malicious attacks aren't the only reason apps or suites can crash. A poorly written update from the vendor can do it just as easily. I'd much rather deal with one portion of my security package failing than see all of it crash from one vulnerability or vendor mistake. With separate components, it's very unlikely they can all be taken out by a single attack. Separate security apps can be configured to monitor and protect each other. Some can prevent others from being terminated or even restart another if it is successfully terminated.

Even if the level of protection afforded by each option was the same, I'd still choose separate components. I prefer being able to choose components that match the strategy I want to use.
Rick

 

Security suites don´t offer flexibility. Each vendor proposes a security solution which can´t be adequate for all.

 

Plus, it's no fun. And it costs money. And it's hard it can be good in all features.
Did i mention money? Oh yeah, that too.

 

I prefer individual applications. Because in most cases internet security suites could slowdown your pc. Also some parts of suites can't compete with specific tools for example anti-malware software. But with a suite you know that everything will work fine together.

 

Hi Niels:

All security software mix and match/individual take a bite out of PC's thus
"slow down your pc" , so in that sense suites are no different. The sum of specific individual components may be greater than a specific suite. Each case is unique and you can't generalize.

We should look at the forum's dedicated to support suite users to see that "everything works fine together". Look before you leap!

You are correct that they SHOULD work fine.

If you look at ZA's latest Suite, in which they use KAV, ZA has actually agreed with us by their actions that mix and match is best, they didn't or couldn't make a better AV/ASW engine themselves so went out and got KAV to save themselves (maybe). Now they have Vista compatibility issues that have alrady been solved by other suite makers such as NORTON! QED

 

Hi Escalader

I am aware that every software uses a bit of cpu power. But in the past when I only used Panda Platinum Internet security my pc was very slow. Then I decided to remove it and install separate security software and now everything works faster. I now that you can't generalize that's why I wrote "could" and "in most cases". That was my own opinion.

Niels

 

Hi Niels:

Yes, you are correct again your opinion is good!

My view was more directed to the idea that suites should/could work together well but as you point out with your panda experience don't always do so!

Cheers

PS what is your systems set up now? mine is visible and ready for your comment!

 

Amen.
I was previously running NOD32 and Comodo on a desktop and laptop, both running WinXP SP2. Now I am using KIS 6.0.2.614 on each and while not as granular as the previous setup, the interface is easier on the eyes and frustration level. Scanning takes a little longer with KIS, but on the other hand, pausing protection on my desktop PC when used for gaming makes for better frame rates than previously experienced.
I'm also using a NAT router/firewall and go back and forth between using VMware and Power Shadow, so at least for now, I'm spending somewhat less time dealing with config and compatibility issues by going with the suite.
I'm sitting on the fence here, trying to decide which setup i like better.

 

Where can you go for objective comparisons of security suites?

AV comparatives does AV products as we all know but I see zip on suites.

I think PC World Mag does comparisons, how does KAV suite compare to say Norton , ZA etc? Anybody done that work?

If you are fence sitting if can be painful ( bad joke) but couldn't resist it

 

I read these posts with interest, I was always a great believer in the (free) multi /individual component approach to security, AOL AVS/AntiVir Personal Edition or similar, ZoneAlarm, Spyware Terminator basically whatever was highly rated on Download.com when I needed it, however, got a six month trial of KIS on a cover disc, cleaned my system out of all the other stuff and never looked back!
Paid for the renewal when it came due (good value even if not free), for me one update file, one scan and one point of call if any issues, my laptop seems quicker and I actually feel more secure!
So thanks to the Don and all the others who recommend KIS, I am a convert.

 

what about suite plus standalone apps? Id say twice the power right?

 

The key is making sure the apps "get along" with each other - we (SUPERAntiSpyware) have put quite a bit of effort to minimize the conflicts with other applications as we realize people run more than one solution. Just something to keep in mind when selecting a security application or set of applications.

 

But how does one judge this by the book meaning if there is no clearly seen conflict how can one avoid ineffectiveness under the hood or is this too far fetched?

 

Unfortunately there is no scientific way to know ahead of time, so you have to rely on the vendors, individual users and other "reviews" to see/determine what applications can play well with others. In our testing, typically the "larger" suites don't play well with the more "complete" (feature rich) individual applications and certainly can't get along with other suites.