Which antivirus respect your privacy and allow you to send NO data to their cloud?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Aimi, Oct 3, 2012.

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

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    LMAO. Ppl are complaining over "privacy" of cloud systems and then you recommend them Chrome. LMAO AHAHAHAAHAHA... You just lost all the credibility right there...

    @Baz_kasp
    That would be true if cloud powered AV's haven't proven their quality. But they have. Just look at Kingsoft or Panda Cloud...
     
  2. Stefan Kurtzhals

    Stefan Kurtzhals AV Expert

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Posts:
    702
    LOL!

    Ok, how does the cloud magically creates signatures to save money on malware analysts according to your logic?

    Sorry, you seem to have absolutely no idea what a protection cloud is, how it is working, how expensive it is to run and why it is necessary.

    And to even top it, you are worried about privacy but recommend Chrome.

    I really hope that no user listens to the nonsense you are saying. Malware writers would approve it, though.
     
  3. Baz_kasp

    Baz_kasp Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Posts:
    593
    Location:
    London
    You misunderstood my message, I'm saying we have a lot of self styled experts on wilders who shout about things they have absolutely no idea about.
     
  4. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Mostly those that oppose the cloud technology...
     
  5. Cloud

    Cloud Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Posts:
    1,029
    Location:
    United States
    lol Yeah right! It is WAY more expensive to use cloud scanning than the traditional method. We're talking about a multi-million dollar infrastructure! :argh: And let's not forget about the additional cost of maintenance and development that follows in order to provide this technology in their products.
     
  6. steve1955

    steve1955 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Posts:
    1,384
    Location:
    Sunny(in my dreams)Manchester,England
    seem to oppose any new technology,in earlier times they would have probably been Luddites
     
  7. kareldjag

    kareldjag Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2004
    Posts:
    622
    Location:
    PARIS AND ITS SUBURBS
    hi
    Alerternatives answers...

    *Forget antivirus, cloud based or not. As they are not absolutelly needed for a strong security (see the History of Insecurity and how many times they have failed). And if you wish to stay in Windows (also not good for privacy), just use system hardening, HIPS, router and protocol analyzer.
    If you are not a partsian of efforts to know more, then switch to Linux/Unix world where most default configurations provide a strong security if we consider that most malwares ( >80% ) are designed for Microsoft platforms.

    *As you suggested it, try any serious cloud av, and audit the impact on privacy (locally with Wireshark/Capsa/NetworkMiner etc) and remotelly with Backtrack (NMAP fro instance).
    Well...very fastidious task...especially if you read carrefully each EULA...

    *Trust the trusted...
    One of the pioneer of cloud antivirus is TrendMicro, which has a mature technology, and as far as i know, it is one of the rare FIPS certified cloud antivirus campany on the market http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/STM/cavp/documents/aes/aesval.html (1752/1753)
    This certification validates the reliability of the data protection via encryption.
    Even if it is not a warranty of privacy rights protection.

    *Forget cloud based antivirus because their technology does not solve the detection problem (demonstrated as Undecideable and N-P Complete http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-complete ) and choose a traditional av with a strong HIPS module, or in combination with HIPS.

    If the raise of technology is very fast, it is not the case of the law and privacy rights as pointed out by many articles and research papers.

    Security for the Mass is not security for everyone...and there is no miracle to expect from the clouds...

    Rgds

    Edit 2 typo mistakes.
     
  8. I never said anything about privacy. Check your facts buddy and re-read what I've posted. I'm talking about security not privacy that's another issue all together.
     
  9. Yeah? How many boxes does PANDA have? Lets go into details.

    And I'm not saying CLOUD is FUD, I'm saying the way AV suites market it and how its implemented is FUD.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 9, 2012
  10. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Stop saying FUD, god i hate this word which has no freakin meaning to anyone like "bloated" doesn't because everyone use it for every damn thing without knowing what it even really means.

    And you're screaming everything is fud and how its imp'lemented is fud. Have you build one cloud system for AV to know how its implemented? Do you have any in-depth knowledge of such system? I'm pretty sure you don't.

    I don't see anything wrong with any kind of implementation they use. Every vendor decided for different method and none is bad. It only brings benefits in one or another way, thats why the even went through all the trouble making it in the first place...
     
  11. I'll put it in english for you. Most AV is pure marketing ~Snip~ , this includes this CLOUD AV rubbish. Fact is AV's can't ~Snip~ do against targeted attacks. Generic rubbish programmed malware like ZUESS it may detect but that's up for discussion.

    Also why do you think every product contains a sandbox? Because they can't detect ~Snip~ .

    ~Let's keep these discussions on the high road please.~
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 9, 2012
  12. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Sorry, but you don't have a freakin clue about anything do you? I'll put it in plain english for you as well. Stop saying things because you're just making yourself look like an a%#.

    And for your info, hardly any AV has sandbox feature. Comodo, Kaspersky used to have it but i don't think they use it anymore and avast!. And implementation of each is very different as well. Comodo uses it to allow running of apps in isolated environment until they are analysed by CAMAS or whitelisted, avast! uses it to analyze unknown executables in isolated environment using behavior analysis. And thats basically it.
     
  13. Cloud

    Cloud Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Posts:
    1,029
    Location:
    United States
    Boxes? Meaning...?

    Not every AV implements technology the same way.
     
  14. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,899
    Location:
    localhost
    I can only see something very clear in here: do not to feed the trolls :)
     
  15. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,201
    Perhaps we should get back to the title of the topic rather than fight amongst 'ourselves' ?

    Wouldn't you agree, RejZoR ?
     
  16. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    118,470
    Location:
    Texas
    Antivirus, more correctly called anti-malware these days is still a viable and good solution for most non-security educated users.

    Malware is not found by hackers alone. Researchers at the anti-malware companies do very good work.

    Too say otherwise is not fair to the researchers in the industry.
     
  17. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,741
    Location:
    UK
    Kaspersky did have a sandbox feature in the last couple of versions at least, but they've dropped it entirely in their 2013 IS product.
     
  18. Stefan Kurtzhals

    Stefan Kurtzhals AV Expert

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Posts:
    702
    I am using the detection AI we created the Avira cloud for over 1 year now. And it is still a miracle for me. :D And the work on the next version of it already has begun.

    I would never agree to a project that would send away user data if the benefit for the user wouldn't be very high. When we designed our cloud, the goal was from the very beginning to send only the minimum required data we need to deliver next generation protection. And basically all the people that worked on designing it are privacy concerned paranoids :cool:
     
  19. Honestly Cloud i respect PANDA, you obviously have some smart people working there. But the CLOUD marketing makes me grind my teeth because there is a lot of marketing hype going into selling the product that would be just as good in detection if it wasn't in the CLOUD.
     
  20. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Sure. How will you deliver response time of the cloud with a non cloud system and using regular definitions? It's just not possible unless you want to deliver idiotically high ammount of data to every computer using update checks every 5 minutes or so.
     
  21. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,171
    Earlier I mentioned three things that would give even a modestly privacy knowledgeable/concerned person heart burn: 1) The sending of actual URLs, 2) The sending of file pathnames, 3) Tagging cloud lookups/submissions with a GUID. I would be interested to know how you privacy paranoids approached those three things.
     
  22. That depends on how good they are at rolling out definitions. It still takes time to analyze the malware by a person in the lab irrespective of the cloud. That's what counts, having good analsysts in the war room looking over new threats.

    As long as the product works I don't think people care if you get an update every 30 minutes. A few well known brands do that. You don't need the CLOUD, though I understand why people are using it as a marketing tool because it's this new shiny buzzword.

    I'm not against progress I'm just calling out the marketing hype.
     
  23. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I'd say 90% of malware is machine analyzed these days... Only the specific stuff and stuff that gets discarded from the automated systems is analyzed by hand. Stefan will be able to tell more about this though...

    Also i don't know why are you screaming "buzzword" so hard. If you offer a fature others don't have, of course you'll be mentioning it whenever possible. Why do you think Volvo is bragging so much about pedestrians airbag so much these days for their latest cars? Because they are the only ones providing it and you simply have to market it to attract customers. I don't see anything strange about that.
     
  24. Cloud

    Cloud Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Posts:
    1,029
    Location:
    United States
    Thank you, but I will like to inform you that I am not a Panda employee (a boy can dream! :argh:). I am simply a hired volunteer, working under Pbust and the other employees available on the forum. :)
     
  25. Yes I know they rely on automated tools. But they still have to do the leg work on the targeted stuff. Those samples need people on the ground doing the hard work. This is where I respect Kaspersky, Bitdefender & Norton. They have some really talented people working for them doing research and analysys.

    On the buzzword. Well people don't understand what CLOUD is, why it's good and what it does. They just think "super duper cloud" not really understanding what it's useful for.
     
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.