Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by KAVcurious, Oct 16, 2005.
Blue what would the additional value be added to Kav and safen sec with Boclean ? thanks
What precisely are you running simultaneously?
Primarily as a simple backup, although I do have an specific rationale behind it.
SafenSec is my ultimate backup. It doesn't recognize malware per se (well, it can, but that's another matter...), but does flag on activities which are employed by malware (as well as install/uninstall applications, setup/configuration programs, etc.). It therefore doesn't get outdated and it supposedly can control things rather well after an infection occurs if you put it into Total mode. It's the wall of last resort, but requires user input.
Although lots of folks note how easy it is to teach almost any user how to handle themselves with alerts involving registry writes, file edits/deletions, and so on, my own experience is..., uhmm.., very mixed on this point. For genuine malware, I want a direct backup to KAV that is automated and unambiguous before SafenSec gets directly involved. BOClean fills that bill quite nicely, has generous licensing terms for home users, and behaves with most programs. It behaves with both KIS and SafenSec at the moment, and that is the key issue. For a knowledgable user, I would agree with your what's implied by your question, it is somewhat redundant, but I'm configuring for the rest of the family. Naturally, redundancy is what having a backup is all about. Between those three applications (on my working partition it's four with NOD32/BOClean/SafenSec/LooknStop) I get rather solid protection with minimal impact on system responsiveness.
Thanks blue. I have never run with Boclean. However Its a good looking choice.
Well I get real hazzy with it all from time to time. lol . I just do not have a deep enough understanding of some of these areas. Which brings me back to simplicity and the need for fewer applications with good sound protection and lite on the system.
I like your choices
Have you tried disabling the start-up scan?
By the way, I have mine disabled as a matter of routine configuration. That's something I forget about.
Excellent support always. Interesting posts by Kevin from time to time. I have it on all my home PC's. No trial, but an iron clad money back guarantee if purchased from the vendor directly (return policies for resellers depends on the reseller - go through PSC directly for optimal service).
Thanks, but the kudos clearly go to the developers. I do know where you're coming from. Striking that balance is a fluid problem. The two configurations mentioned seems to fit my personal objectives (light, infrequent alerts, minimal user configuration/interaction, comprehensive coverage, robust, good for a wide range of expertise) well. I'm sure there are other choices which would work as well, but these are the ones to which I've migrated.
Blue both yourself and blackcat are beta testing safensec2 .Have you or Alan tested the firewall as yet ?
I've only taken a quick look at it. Seems to be a straight application based firewall with the option to Allow/Block an action, an action in session, an action always, any action in session, or any action always by originating application.
As for beta testing, I'm wouldn't classify myself as an active beta tester in the sense of seriously stress testing the program, but I do assist mainly in the final editing/proofing of the English localization (it's already translated, I just localize to a native speaker) and I do run into beta type issues from time to time which I make note of. I mainly run the beta to see the menus/messages/alerts in their native format. I do this because I think it's a rather nice package and I do use it.
thank you for your help and guidance
Just a bit of an off-topic followup, I've configured by primary partition to use the SnS firewall capability in place of LooknStop. It actually seems to work fairly well. I've not tested it extensively, just looking at compatibility and performance thus far, which looks quite fine. On-topic: I'd says it's similar in flavor to the AH component of KIS - not all the detailed configuration options of a standalone firewall, but generally the level I like to see for an average user.
I am also running the latest SnS beta. I tested the network activity against a few sites like Gibsons Shields up. No stealthing at all and one open port. Asked Star-Force about it and they said it really wasn't ready for prime time and just to ignore it, so I turned it off.
Yes, if you already have a software firewall installed, this primitive network attack module should be disabled.
since speaking last with you Blue I contacted Sns and they sent me the beta to play with. I were really interested in the firewall component. I loaded it on a clean install and went to a couple of port scanners . It came back all ports closed. I thought about the massive threads in the past on the values of "stealth vs Closed" and felt that "thats cool " It will do for now . I contacted Sns and asked their opinion about "closed" ports and If they felt that this was ok. They said they were actually working on this area currently. He then asked me how I managed to get all "closed" I kind of thought about this and really didnt know how to reply as I had just loaded the thing up and let it rip. So I uninstalled it and went back to the port scanners and ran them on my pc .(with no firewall installed) They came up with exactly the same results . So I gather from that that my pc ports are all closed. My conclusion being that SnS is very transparant However I have no doubt that when they do complete their firewall SnS will be an excellent product and one that I shall run with.
Separate names with a comma.