What AV for win98se - avira turning off

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by ReaderK, Dec 5, 2007.

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

    ReaderK Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Posts:
    6
    Avira are turning off their older stuff this month - licence has not updated so I guess there is no reprieve. Using PE Classic (free) at the moment.

    A number of others have also stopped win98se support this year - so who is worth using ?

    Or would it be worth switching to an execution white list - what would you recommend ?

    For me the nice thing about a/v with a live scan is that it even spots bogus webpages & attachments on the way into the cache.

    And before anyone says - its too old and insecure - compare the list of known vulnerabilities on 98 vs XP. I think you'll find it was far more secure out the box and remains safer as its a smaller target. Router protects from port inbound - so its AV (or similar) to trojans that are sneaking in.
     
  2. Brian N

    Brian N Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,148
    Location:
    Denmark
    Avast works with Windows 98 ;)
     
  3. dan_maran

    dan_maran Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Posts:
    1,053
    Location:
    Stamford, CT
    Both VBA32 and DrWeb still support Windows 98 SE.
     
  4. JasSolo

    JasSolo Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Posts:
    414
    Location:
    Denmark
    AVG will support until august 2008.


    Cheers
     
  5. herbalist

    herbalist Guest

    Whitelisting the executables of your system and installed apps is a very effective security policy. It's best on systems that change very little. Win98 is an ideal choice for this type of security policy as there are no patches or updates to install anymore. It's also harder for users to change apps on a whim because a lot of software doesn't run on it.

    Even though some AVs still support 98, they're designed for newer systems and can be a heavy load on a 98 box, especially if it's the original hardware. More of the AVs will be dropping support for 98 so even if you do find one you like, there's a limit to how long you'll be able to use it before you're back to the same problem. For long term viability, whitelisting the known executables is the best option. Besides, a lot of the malicious code in circulation has no effect on 9X systems.

    It takes a little work to set up a good whitelist. I'd advise against using the policy editor as an enforcing tool. It doesn't check the integrity of the processes or their paths and can be bypassed by renaming a blocked executable to something that's allowed. A more powerful and very effective option for 98 is the free version of System Safety Monitor. It takes time to configure and requires the user to be fairly knowlegable (or willing to learn) about system processes, but it is the most effective option available for 98. It's also lighter on the system than any AV. On its lower settings, it's a very effective whitelisting tool. On its highest setting, (paranoid mode) it will block everything not specifically allowed. It not only controls what processes and apps can run, it controls what other processes each one can start or be started by.

    I stopped using a resident AV over 2 years ago. System Safety Monitor has handled the real time protection flawlessly on my primary PC. I also set up a test PC, 98SE, secured with SSM and Kerio 2.1.5. and tried to infect it. IMO, SSM will protect a 98 box from most anything except the users decisions.

    Rick
     
  6. JasSolo

    JasSolo Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Posts:
    414
    Location:
    Denmark
    Almost forgot, running ESS and all :D ....NOD32 still support Win95/98/ME.


    Cheers
     
  7. ccsito

    ccsito Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Posts:
    1,579
    Location:
    Nation's Capital
  8. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    :thumb:

    even im thinking of downgrading my windows, back to XP.

    certain things are giving me problems, and not everything still works on it.

    Itunes is a major hassle on Vista, constant freezes to my machine, even with fresh formats, usually when using the 'get info' to rename the tracks.
    at the moment, its un-usable, cant even send all my music to my iphone, piece of sh1t.
     
  9. EliteKiller

    EliteKiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Posts:
    1,138
    Location:
    TX
    FWIW I use Kaspersky IS 6.0.2.621 on my Win98 boxes at the office since the resource usage is low and the detection/removal rates are top notch.
     
  10. Brian N

    Brian N Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,148
    Location:
    Denmark
    Surely you mean upgrading back to XP :p
    Vista is basically Windows ME 2.0 with an OS X flavor.
     
  11. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    itunes doesnt work for me on it, even after a fresh format.

    it all loads up, add files to the library and syncing etc all works.

    however, use 'get info' to rename your music, add artwork etc, and the system completely crashes, not healthy.
     
  12. Diver

    Diver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,444
    Location:
    Deep Underwater
    Win 98, OMG. Get yourself another computer. Asking for security advice for Win 9X is like asking what kind of knife to take to a gunfight.

    CSJ gives up on Vista, join the club. I tried for months to get that pig to whistle, but it kept getting worse over time. XP SP3 RC1 runs like a top.
     
  13. ASpace

    ASpace Guest


    So , it is too old , insecure and less functional. We can compare known vulnerabilities but a Win 9x machine is unsupported by most vendors and less functional and even though 9x might have less known vulnerabilities , it is much easier to protect Windows XP , right ;)
     
  14. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    3 Win 98SE machines here sailing smoothly :)
     
  15. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    a laptop that is higher spec than my own, with vista for less than £350/$700 at pcworld UK.

    anything less than XP is just stupid now,

    just what i think :)
     
  16. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Not if you live in the third-world or don't want to dump those good Duron 700 MHz w/128 MB of RAM.
    Win 98SE (or a light Linux distro) runs fine on them.
     
  17. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    @ReaderK,

    Few choices for win98se but if you still want to keep it over XP, i'd suggest Avast :cool:

    Forget about Vista.
     
  18. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    hi, yep....

    ive reverted back to XP and everything is running fantastic (so far....)

    1.JPG

    its running really fast, and with 53 processes

    but....

    only 341mb ram used.

    vista was 600+ used and slower, i didnt think it would be such a difference in speed
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2007
  19. ReaderK

    ReaderK Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Posts:
    6
    Great - :) Send me a cheque and I'll go and buy something as long as it hasn't got vista on it.

    Actually I doubt those cheap machines really have enough power to run vista beyond bootup. Vista bootup edition (or home basic as microsoft call it).

    I could put something else on the PC BUT any other windows will slow these things down loads.... I believe the rule of thumb is slowdown by 20%-25% for each proper version of windows; and that assumes you can find drivers for ALL the hardware.
     
  20. Diver

    Diver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,444
    Location:
    Deep Underwater
    Nice desktop CSJ. My memory usage under Vista was 650 or thereabouts. XP has 33 processes and 290 mb, and that is with memory hungry Symantec AV. (No endorsement of Symantec AV implied.)
     
  21. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    u don't need to tell me that its a sexy desktop, I know ;)
     
  22. ellison64

    ellison64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Posts:
    2,499
    I merrily used 98se up until a few months or so ,then i "upgraded" to w2000 pro.Even then the only reason to change from 98se to 2000 was to just try all those programes that id hear about on here but wouldnt run on 98se ;) .I always found running 98 to be like a vintage car enthusiast ,you had to tinker with it to to get it just right and nver deviate from what you knew worked best with it.However curiosity always got the better of me and id install a programme that i shouldnt and then it would be a quick one /two with the restore disk.:D
    ellison
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.