Why use other software than a Security Suite?

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by berryracer, Mar 3, 2012.

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

    berryracer Suspended Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Posts:
    1,640
    Location:
    Dubai, UAE
    I am running both Kaspersky Internet Security 2012 + MBAM PRO (exclutions set) b ut sometimes I wonder....isn't this too much?

    I mean what is Kaspersky designed to remove? Viruses and malware right? (correct me if I'm wrong)

    What is MBAM designed to protect against and remove? Malware/Trojans right?

    1) Would someone be fine by just running a seucrity suite (antivirus+firewall) or is it a must these days to also have MBAM or some other similar program?

    2) What is the difference between what Kaspersky Internet Security does and what MBAM does?

    3) What is the difference between a virus, malware, torjan? They all seem like the same $h!zn!t to me
     
  2. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Are you familiar with the phrase " Jack of all trades, master of none"? Well that's what a lot of people feel you get with a suite and they also say that dedicated separate programs used in combination do a more thorough job. I think you would be fine with what you have. I use MBAM (on demand only )kind of like a second opinion from another doctor as to your health.
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2012
  3. berryracer

    berryracer Suspended Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Posts:
    1,640
    Location:
    Dubai, UAE
    Right, you have a good point there.....but now would you please tell me what is the difference between a virus and a trojan and a malware in layman's terms?

    Back in the days when I used to be a gamer, all you had to do is get an antivirus and that's it! now you have to do many things just to be safe and I dont know the difference......

    Like I dont know why we need a firewall, if we are sitting there not doing anything stupid....I mean I don't think some random hacker in the world is just going to somehow get your IP address and start hacking you but please excuse my ignorance as I am not very familiar with the technicality of these things o_O
     
  4. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,726
    Location:
    localhost
    Yes, a good security suite + some common sense and you will be fine. :thumb:
    Approach: Muster one solid security tool. Don't mess up with the many best.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2012
  5. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    I would be just showing my own ignorance if I attemted to explain all this, but I do know that a firewall is a must. There will be other posters with technical and programing backgrounds that will more than likely explain what you want to know in laymans terms as this thread develops. Some of the explanations can get quite involved. Remember though that we all come with our own personal biases.
     
  6. crofttk

    crofttk Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Posts:
    1,976
    Location:
    Eastern PA, USA
    (empasis mine)

    Berryracer,

    Here's a little math to drive that point home:

    Consider two equally capable programs and assume they detect the same kind of malware/virus/trojan or whatever. Let's assume they are designed, developed, programmed by two entirely independent companies/authors and, although they likely have overlap in detection/protection techniques, they have differences in those techniques where one captures what the other doesn't and vice versa. Let's assume they both have a 92% detection rate and that the 8% they miss are completely different (admittedly, this may not be a great assumption for 0-day threats).

    From there, the two better than one argument is basically this:

    With one program, you have a 100% - 92% = 8% ( 1 - 0.92 = 0.08 ) chance of getting infected.

    With both programs in effect you have a 0.08 * 0.08 = 0.0064, or 0.64% chance of getting infected.

    Yes, alot of assumptions and what-ifs and all things are not always equal, but that is the basic premise behind the argument that two are better than one, a fraction of a % chance of infection versus a several % chance of infection.

    I guess, of course, that begs the question of which two have the least overlap, the least conflict, and, hence, give you the best combined improbability of being infected.

    Not being able to make the most perfect choice of which two or, for that matter, choosing only one can likely (or not, depending on the user) be made up for by filling the gap with some common sense (as fax posted).
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2012
  7. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    crofftk nice points. I think maybe another point that could be made is that besides detection ability there is removal ability in case something infects a machine. Besides the potentially same mathematical argument that could be made with removal (as crofftk makes with detection) there is probably a school of thought that having a program (such as MBAM, SAS, A2, etc) already installed generally makes removing malware easier than hoping to be able to install a removal utility after being infected.
     
  8. cheater87

    cheater87 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    3,122
    Location:
    Pennsylvania.
    Because if you get some nasty malware it could disable the ENTIRE suite. If you have a different firewall, AV etc then not everything could be affected due to malware.
     
  9. noone_particular

    noone_particular Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Posts:
    3,798
    There are no clearly defined lines between these. The terms are also misused constantly.
    Malware is basically any kind of malicious code. It can be a virus, trojan, worm, rootkit, adware, etc.
    The commonly accepted definition of a virus is a piece of malicious code that self replicates and spreads itself, much like a real virus. Most advertizing that targets the typical or average user will use the term virus to describe most any kind of malicious code.
    The common definition of trojan is an app that gives someone else partial or total control over your PC without your consent.

    The different terms have never been officially defined and different vendors all had their own definitions for them. What one vendor called a trojan, another called adware or a worm. The results were duplicated coverage and missed detections. The lines have always been blurred. OTOH, a lot of modern malware can fit in several "categories". The same piece of code can be a trojan, adware, and a rootkit all at the same time. IMO, trying to fit malicious code into predefined categories is a waste of time and benefits no one but those advertizing a detection-removal product.
     
  10. STV0726

    STV0726 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Posts:
    900
    I am not a "productist"...at least not any more. A productist is someone who believes 3rd party security software must be installed, and furthermore the best should always be installed.

    I'd rather you pick a CONSISTENTLY good suite as you have, then focus on user education proactively and if you want an additional layer MBAM is good but I'd rather you add a whitelist layer instead.

    But you're fine. There's people running no AV.
     
  11. guest

    guest Guest

    I believe in using one Security program
    not 35 or more to slow down or clog up
    my PC, if it can't handle the job it's time
    for a different one that can
    If all else fails there is a clean backup image
     
  12. Antarctica

    Antarctica Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Posts:
    1,617
    Location:
    Canada
    My wife is not computer literate and she has been using a suite for the last
    5 years without any problem. I scan her computer with MBAM or SAS from time to time and it is always clean.And like guest says, a good image backup will save you in case of bad luck.
     
  13. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    The way I see it, a security suite usually contains a firewall, antivirus, antispyware, maybe a behavior blocker. There's also sometimes a backup component, antispam, web site reputation checker, tune up component, password saver, etc, etc. There's a good chance many of these components were acquired from 3rd party vendors. Just take Norton, Kaspersky and AVG suites, for example. So what's the difference if a person wants to run individual programs as opposed to a multi-function suite? Sure there is one GUI of a suite and all the individual apps are more tied together. And there's a chance that the components of a suite will not have conflicts. But the functionality is very similar to having individual programs instead of a suite. And I believe in the school of thought that programs from different vendors provide a better layer of defense than the multiple programs from the same vendor.
     
  14. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    I consider that a layered approach tends to offer more security, because usually in Security Suites the modules are kinda simple but when you have a layered approach each of the software were developed specifically to fulfill it's task as best as it can. :D
    Just my opinion :)
     
  15. Tarantula

    Tarantula Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Posts:
    357
    Yes, it's too much. Kaspersky IS 2012 is good enough. You don't need another real-time protection software.
     
  16. JoeBlack40

    JoeBlack40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Posts:
    1,572
    Location:
    Romania
    My thoughts too :thumb:
     
  17. ams963

    ams963 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Posts:
    5,965
    Location:
    Parallel Universe
    +1 .....:thumb:
     
  18. Doraemon

    Doraemon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Posts:
    202
    In my experience suites tend to have more errors in their modules than if you use specific software. I.e. I have had several problems in the past with the firewalls in Avira and ESET. So I prefer to use a specific firewall which I know will be more professional than just an add-on to a suite.

    So now I prefer to install an antivirus (MSE) and a firewall (Windows Firewall + WF Control) and a cloud app (WSAC). Add some FFX addons, Ad Muncher and WinPatrol. Plus MBAM, SAS, Hitman on demand every month or couple of months.

    :D :D :D
     
  19. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
    good idea:thumb:
     
  20. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    USA
    I agree. I have 2 paid licenses each for SAS and MBAM and gave up on both of them. They are just extra maintenance to keep updated when I just don't seem to need them. And when the day comes I do need them, I will likely just reformat anyway.
     
  21. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
    i know but for example when cleaning up a computer which is not your and not allow to formatt and u need to scan and clean it up the house hitmanpro and mbam are the best players even when antivirus is present:)yestarday i did clean a computer with norton internet security suite on:)
     
  22. kjdemuth

    kjdemuth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Posts:
    2,960
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    I had to use a whole array of scanners to clean a clients laptop. Hitman, MBAM, kaspersky virus scanner and TDSS killer, SAS, CCE. Oddly enough each scanner found something the other didn't. Hitman and MBAM found the major stuff and then the others found traces or a few ad-ware. Hitman and MBAM are both top notch.
     
  23. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
  24. Dark Shadow

    Dark Shadow Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Posts:
    4,553
    Location:
    USA
    Hours and hours of scanners to clean up a infected system and still maybe a few lingering malwares.A ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,but when then ounce fails there is not a better feeling then a fresh clean install or a clean image.
     
  25. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Maybe, the key is to use a product with great real time protection so that scanning really isnt required. And I agree, cleaning from the start is required along with a good back-up image for safety. Seems that Emmisoft found a great second party vendor to trust to do this.;)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.