Would you trust f-prot protection?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by BrainWarp, Feb 23, 2006.

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

    BrainWarp Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Posts:
    287
    Who uses f-prot?I really do not read much about this antivirus even though it uses less resources that any other i have seen.Does the f-stopw realtime use hurestics or some other method and how effective is it?Currently i am using avast4.6 pro on one computer and f-prot on the other.
     
  2. metallicakid15

    metallicakid15 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Posts:
    454
    avast pro should be enough but if you want to see how f-prot does against other av's check this www.av-comparatives.org
     
  3. Alphalutra1

    Alphalutra1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Posts:
    1,160
    Location:
    127.0.0.0/255.0.0.0
    I use F-Prot for DOS and it is great.

    For the real-time function, it has a super small footprint which is very good. The detection is also good, but heuristics need a little improvement. Not much causes this program to exceed other products except for the small footprint.

    Alphalutra1
     
  4. BrainWarp

    BrainWarp Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Posts:
    287
    On the av-comparatives it really is amazing on how well f-prot does with such a very small footprint.Anyone know when 4.0 will be out?
     
  5. JimIT

    JimIT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,035
    Location:
    Denton, Texas
    F-PROT is an excellent antivirus. It's small, lightweight, no frills, and no nonsense. It will protect you well. I've found it's particularly good on older laptops.
     
  6. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,779
    I am using it now and it's extremely light. About 8mb total here for the real time protection and the updating. There are times when I also disable all that and just use it as an on-demand scanner too. But so far it's done a great job. I like it quite a bit.
     
  7. trickyricky

    trickyricky Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2005
    Posts:
    475
    Location:
    London, UK
    I've used F-Prot for years and it's never let me down. It's exactly what a good AV should be - great protection and barely perceptible presence.
     
  8. BrainWarp

    BrainWarp Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Posts:
    287
    I also disable the auto update feature in services.msc.Even on the older 1500mhz computer it is on there is no hit on speed.On that same computer avast 4.6 pro did have a hit.
     
  9. bellgamin

    bellgamin Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    5,648
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Another plus for F-Prot is Frisk's superb technical support.

    As to version 4.0 for Windows, it has been "on the horizon" for several months now. IMHO, Frisk will release 4.0 the minute that they get it working smooth as silk, with all the *necessary* features, & still maintain the light footprint for which they are deservedly famous.

    In the meantime, the current F-Prot gives tight protection but (for the moment at least) couple of others are a bit tighter.
     
  10. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,721
    Location:
    Texas
    One of the very best.
     
  11. dw2108

    dw2108 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2006
    Posts:
    480
    I trust F-Prot very much, especially on older machines running Win 98 SE. With F-Prot, Spyware Blaster, Bug Off and Win Patrol, I have never had any problems other than Scotty's @#$&% barking.

    Dave
     
  12. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    F-Prot, in case you didn't know, is the ORIGINAL AV...the VERY FIRST AV. F-Prot boasts TWO world class researchers and some more well known and widely used AV don't even have one.

    I have used F-Prot and the support is outstanding. My only quarrel with it is the limitations on the GUI when using it with XP. It is probably the best AV for 98/ME because of its lightness. On XP though, the GUI leaves much to be desired. I got tired of waiting for 4.0. If it had come out by now I would probably be using it, but the delays have been too long and I wanted it for XP not 98SE where the current GUI is fine.
     
  13. wilbertnl

    wilbertnl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Posts:
    1,850
    Location:
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    F-prot functions very well, and it has a friendly license:
    You are permited to install F-prot on 5 home computers for $29.
     
  14. QBgreen

    QBgreen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Posts:
    627
    Location:
    Queens County, NY
    Installed on the wife's machine, and the laptops of several non-tech friends. I schedule the scans and signature updating, it does the rest. An old war horse that still has some gallop left in it!
     
  15. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    How is the GUI limited when using XP?
     
  16. Don Pelotas

    Don Pelotas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    2,257
    Options are not an option :eek: ....... limited in configurability. ;)
     
  17. waters

    waters Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Posts:
    934
    I must be the only one with problems.I can get command antivirus free with ntl,and i swop between antivir and command.On one swop antivir picked up 4 trojans which command failed to detect.These were confirmed by sending them off to antivir,and by jotti.Command antivirus is based on f prot engin so both should be on par.So i can get for free and i dare not use it
     
  18. BrainWarp

    BrainWarp Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Posts:
    287
    I would never trust just an antivirus byitself so i do use ewido along side just incase a trojan is missed
     
  19. lifehacker

    lifehacker Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    Posts:
    44
    Just tried f-prot out, it seems to use a huge amount of CPU. :mad:
     
  20. BrainWarp

    BrainWarp Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Posts:
    287

    Thats very strange--on my computer it uses the least of any other antivirus i have tried--like panda,trend,nortan,nod32 etc
     
  21. trickyricky

    trickyricky Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2005
    Posts:
    475
    Location:
    London, UK
    Well, you're in trouble then, as F-Prot is, without doubt, the lightest AV in terms of CPU and memory usage bar none. Unless something on your PC doesn't like F-Prot, which is always a possibility.
     
  22. bellgamin

    bellgamin Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    5,648
    Location:
    Hawaii
    You can get 5% off by buying F-Prot through the Dozleng Security forums at...
    http://www.dozleng.com/updates/index.php?act=shop&CODE=02&cat=1

    I know of only 2 AV programs that come close to F-Prot in terms of low usage of system resources. They are Nod32 & DrWeb.
     
  23. Rmus

    Rmus Exploit Analyst

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Posts:
    3,943
    Location:
    California
    As long as it wasn't the only line of defense.

    This post was made in the malware site thread where many tested the remote code execution:

    (Commenting on the previous post) "... F-Prot finds nothing. We use that at work (not my decision), and it's becoming a pain in the a**;..."

    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=565753#post565753
    _______________________________________

    This is not to pick on f-prot, for all AV have the weakness of being caught off guard at some time, as shown in the recent wmf exploit, where no AV picked up the first .wmf files.

    Back in November during a rash of Sober variants, isc.sans.org commented:

    "IMPORTANT: Antivirus software does not provide any reliable protection against current threats. Viruses like Sober tend to change every few hours well in advance of AV signature updates. The fact that an attachment did not get marked is no indication that it is harmless. We do receive reports of up to date versions of AV software missing some of the recent Sober variants."

    http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?storyid=880

    ---
     
  24. TNT

    TNT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2005
    Posts:
    948
    Yeah, that was me. I've never been impressed with F-Prot. In my experience, its detection of trojans is, indeed, not very satisfactory. Compared to Kaspersky, F-Prot performs quite poorly. Just my experience.
     
  25. lifehacker

    lifehacker Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    Posts:
    44
    Memory usage yes, but both NOD32 and KAV take up less CPU.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.