They can't be safe

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by JerryM, Nov 8, 2006.

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

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Everyone I know, with the exception of a couple of folks, uses AVG free as their AV. Most don't have anything else except the Windows firewall, AdAware, Spotbot, and the free Defender.

    They are surely full of viruses, and keyloggers, and all kinds of malware. Surely their computers are not running very well if at all.

    BUT THEY DO RUN WELL. They remain clean, and just use their computers for whatever without worry.

    We, on the other hand, argue about the absolute best AV, and try to load our machines down with numerous anti-malware applications. Although most of us are not getting infected, some complain that such and sucH AV did not protect.

    Maybe we just need to get AVG or Avast, and use our heads, and still remain clean.

    Of course, if this is all just mainly fun, then lets continue to have fun.

    Best,
    Jerry
     
  2. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I have been preaching, from the dumb side for awhile now, that it doesnt take 900 applications to keep you safe. Rule of thumb, be mindful where you surf, use a more secure browser like Firefox, have a good AV and AS, and if you have a router, windows firewall may be sufficient. Everyone agrees there isnt 100 percent security, but with the above, then going to tons of applications, really doesnt raise the bar that much more.
     
  3. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006

    the thing that causes most of computer problems is the one that presses the right mouse button:D


    lodore
     
  4. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    Amen.
    It's certainly a question of progressively diminishing returns. Part of the issue is the shear number of options available, all of which should perform reasonably well, which can look rather different since, well..., they are. Different approaches to the same end goal can quickly morph into taking all those distinct approaches and implementing them into a single massive security ensemble.

    Blue
     
  5. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    yep, id agree with the original poster... an antivirus is all thats needed, id prefer it if it scan for spyware and thats all you need.

    i dont need a firewall as i have the one in the router which is better, why waste money on all these programs, or clog up your machine when it aint needed.
     
  6. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    I also agree with JerryM, and this is coming from someone who has pretty much tried all the free protection software on their PC over the last several months that was deemed safe to use. (see all my posts. LOL) I did finally settle on AVG Internet Security Suite, which is paid, but am now happy for two reasons. One, it is a very nice set n forget program that works well. And two. As much as I'm tempted to reinstall say the combination of Comodo Firewall and AOL AVS, or Comodo, Antivir PE and Spyware Terminator, I won't give up AVG ISS to do it. I will miss trying the various AntiSpyware's and AV's, but I feel AVG ISS is probably more than enough protection for myself and my wife's PC usage. I have recently dabbled in the HIPS/IDS arena by using Cyberhawk, but have downgraded to WinPatrol Free as an added layer of protection instead whether it's needed or not. The only other software I am thinking about trying in the future may be the new version of Arovax Shield when it's released. From what I have read about the improvements it may be better than WP Free, but that remains to be seen. Anyway, I will add that my 23 year old son has for some time simply been using Windows XP Firewall and Avast Home for protection while definitely having a (IMO) much higher risk factor than my wife and I because of his particular PC use. As far as I know however, he has never been infected with any spyware or one virus on his PC. Maybe this has just been luck, I don't know. What I do know is that he just doesn't seem to be as concerned about it as much as some of us here. I guess the question does still remain though, should he or any of us really be?
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2006
  7. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    nah i dont think we should be,

    an average user may get one virus every 6 months,

    now if you think, £40 for 12 months, ... bit of a rip off yeah?
     
  8. Perman

    Perman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,160
    Hi, folks: Most users of security softwares in cyberspace aquire these apps to satisfy their desire.the peace of mind. This desire is derived from the need/requirement of that app. And that need is generated by the fear, fear of consequences of not having that app. And IMOP, those fears are created by security experts thru publications of all kinds. Folks who read more often are bombarded by these fearful messages. On one hand, knowledges are enriched, the other hand fears are compiled. Folks need to act . And then push upto the chain. I bet w/ my hard earned dollars. Those folks mentioned by the first poster probably seldom or even never read those messages. And even worse, they very likely do not know what are AV, firewall, AS etc. But they are happy campers, day after day. :)
     
  9. sukarof

    sukarof Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Posts:
    1,714
    Location:
    Stockholm Sweden
    Yep I agree, one would think when reading here that internet is harmageddon and a innocent soul wont last many minutes without armor worthy a medieval knight. I am no "better" than anyone else, I used to think so, I have spent alot of money (quick count: ~3-400 dollars) on security software the last couple of years, and they have protected me extremely well - against leaktests, virus samples or other malware testing tools :D
    But the fact is that other than an occasional bad javascript in IE a couple of years ago I have yet to encounter live malware. The biggest benefit I´ve got from HIPS is that my knowledge has increased. Now I know I don't need them :)

    I can not yet let go of my AV or Firewall or my CIPS. I just get a fuzzy feeling having a extra non intrusive layer. But I have let go of the worst "geek" software (yeah, I know everything is relative :) )

    I have a lot of not so computer savvy friends who only use some freeware AV and FW, and they dont yet have common sense when it comes to surfing, as oppose to me who are very suspicious and cautious when I am on the net. But ime they dont have as much infections as one would think. The very few ones they have comes as attachments in email, most of them are caught by their (freeware) AV.
     
  10. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Fully Agreeeeeeeeee!
    It,s great fun to play with these security software BTW.
     
  11. Pedro

    Pedro Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,502
    Well i don't agree. Someone had to lol:D
    1- Just because your AV doen't detect anything, doesn't mean you're uninfected! It means that your AV doen't detect anything, thats all.
    2- I advised a friend just the other day to get AVG AS free, A-squared free... Just to scan and check how was his pc going. Well, folks, he got something like 200+:eek: infections/traces/... Of course i'm talking about Spyware, it's probable that no virus got undetected.
    3- AV gets what got through. A sandbox is the bare minimum one should have other than Firewall and AV. Maybe you don't need anything else. Agreed. Or a suite to cover pretty much everything. Ok. But AV+Firewall doesn't cover you.
    4- Comparing AV free and paid, i agree. The diference is not big. And you can allways get a 2nd opinion from online scans.

    If you don't care about security, and it's all about an AV, to keep the computer functional, why bother?:p
    Just expressing my opinion, not atacking anyone.
    NOR claiming to have it all covered myself.
     
  12. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
  13. tobacco

    tobacco Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Posts:
    1,497
    Location:
    British Columbia

    JerryM

    I'm not disputing what your saying but how do you know they're clean.? Did you scan their systems with say the Kaspersky Online scanner, use the free trial of Spysweeper?. What i've noticed is 'Malware' is getting sneakier by the day and some of it you wouldn't even know it's there if the outbound protection of your 2 way firewall wasn't alerting you to suspicious activity.
    'SafeSurfer' - i hate that word. You shouldn't have to limit the internet experience because of the worry of infection. And using the old setup in this case, you most definitely have to worry.:eek:
     
  14. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i would even go as far as......

    if you are just a surfer, just get a router with the built in firewall and NO ANTIVIRUS.

    should be safe, and just to make sure... plenty of free online scanners than remove aswell, if your one of these users... no need for real time protection in my opinion.
     
  15. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    It may not, but it can quite ably. In fact, less that that can work well although I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who felt compelled to ask for advice.

    It all depends on the challenges incurred and expertise behind the keyboard. Either aspect can work to increase or decrease the need. The range of "recommended" approaches is as wide as the range of users, although it is not that difficult to posit a few very reasonable scenarios that the majority can use to good advantage.

    Blue
     
  16. Pedro

    Pedro Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,502
    OK i understand that. But it's like Tobacco said: i don't want to be restricted. I like to think i surf safe, but even doing that, in this highly commercial environment, where information rules, what's safe? I can't tell. And i don't want to worry. So i isolate the apps with the sandbox, to increase the defense. And so on. But i AM trying to balance a funcional pc and a safe one.
    And since i'm not an expert, i can't trust my "expertise behind the keyboard".:D
     
  17. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    the more you add, the more you slow. Finding the right combo is the key and no one here can answer that. trail and error is what lead me to my setup, and I am 100 percent pleased and secure. But to each his own. But you wont learn about this stuff, unless you come here and ask questions. The wealth of information here, should have a price on it, but it doesnt.:)
     
  18. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    agreed
    i personally would not go that far unless i was on linux.

    with free AV like avg, avast, and antivir everyone can have some protection for their computer.

    maybe its because im not a safe surfer, but id be uncomfortable w/o an AV.
     
  19. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    The same way I know I do not have brain cancer.
    As far as I am concerned, when one's computer runs well, his personal stuff is not compromised (his bank account is OK) and he encounters no problems then what does he care? I do not care whether there MIGHT POSSIBLY be something there as long as it has no affect. That is the case with them, and has been for literally years.

    I think most have the attitude that if it takes hundreds of dollars and much time and effort just to fool with antis then they don't intend to do that. The computer can just get infected, and then they will get it fixed or buy another. I am close to that camp.

    I personally do not intend to use sandboxes, prevx and all the various programs that are recommended as necessary. If the ones I have are not enough I'll just get it fixed or ditch it.

    I do have a total of 8 on one machine and 7 on the other, so I am a little cautious. With KAV 6, and other stuff, I have no fear.
    In over 6 years I have never had anything but cookies, and such stuff. Never a virus.

    Best,
    Jerry
     
  20. Pedro

    Pedro Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,502
    If you think that way, why do you pay for KIS?
     
  21. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Is this for me or Jerry. KIS is a hell of a suite. One of those that like I said, really doesnt require anything else.
     
  22. ccsito

    ccsito Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Posts:
    1,579
    Location:
    Nation's Capital
    I have to admit from reading the many reviews of many programs that cover different aspects of PC security, it does get a bit convoluted and confusing at times with so many diverging opinions. Whether one gets infected or has an adequate PC defense setup can vary from one machine to the next because each user's machine and user access is unique. Sometimes almost next to nothing is sufficient and sometimes a lot of software is not enough. I think the vast majority of PC home users probably have only a few security related applications on their machine (most likely installed when they purchased the unit). Sometimes they never see any problem and sometimes not. So far all of my machines (4 desktops and 3 laptops) have never had any serious infections since I had them (some from the early 1990's). And all of them have only an AV program installed and some W/WO a firewall. The malware landscape has changed since the days of the Apple IIe, but as long as I don't catch the "FORMAT C:" bug, I think I can live with a less protected system. :D
     
  23. Pedro

    Pedro Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,502
    The question was for Jerry
     
  24. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    No problem, I asked because I also have a license for KIS and wont let it go with the MP coming out later.
     
  25. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    I like KAV, not KIS, for the best, or among the best) protection. My thinking is that even though I have several applications, the people I know do not even know about KAV.
    I really believe most here fall either into the paranoid group, or the fun to use and test group.

    Here is what I have on my PC and laptop,
    KAV 6/F-Secure 2007 AV, LnS/Kerio 2.1.5, UnHackMe and Snoopfree on both, Win Patrol Plus, AVG 7.5 AS, SAS, and SG.

    I enjoy trying various apps, and so I have more than I would normally. I admit getting caught up in the culture to some extent.

    No, I do not subscribe completely to their way of thinking, but they do not get infected. That is the proof of the pudding. They also do not visit any risky sites. Most are older, and don't use their computers to see what their AV will do. Some get email that is infected, but AVG has always caught it and removed it.

    So what I do is not the point. The point is that for a lot of folks, AVG and a couple of freebies protect them adequately while we split hairs about the capabilities of AVs, and do not get less infections.

    Best,
    Jerfry
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.