Do you use : No Antivirus , FREE Antivirus , or PAID Antivirus and why?

[Theminecraftaddict555]

So did the ratings shift during the past several months? I've been using Kaspersky and all of a sudden, I've had issues with random network disconnects which was apparently resolved by reinstalling Windows. So was there a malicious file somewhere that Kaspersky knew nothing about? I scanned my external hard drive using Bitdefender free and it found what looked like infected files, but the files should be safe. Should I jump on the Bitdefender bandwagon, then?

Depends on where you get your testing information? And, quite honestly, when it comes to ranking an AV, test results would vary every day, in a true real world test environment. Due to the fact that lab testing is done ONLY with known vulnerabilities that should be covered as is, with each new vulnerability found, one AV may stand out for a few weeks, or maybe months, depending on what kind of exploit/backdoor/etc. there may be, and who manages to patch their AV first.

As far as rankings go with lab testing, results are mostly published once or twice a year, from the sources I've seen, and that is usually what you want to go off for an overall AV. Right now, using my personal criteria, BD, Kaspersky, and ESET seem to have the best ranking scores for minimal user interaction, false flags, false alarms, and overall protection (using AV Comparatives for test results). So far, they're the best place for in depth lab results, so I mainly use them for my personal ranks/scale.

From what I've read about BD and Kasp, I'd pick BD over Kasp any day, because most people seem to have a more paranoid security software with Kasp. Not really heard much about ESET, and I'm not that impressed with their GUI, so I'd personally stick with BD. Also, I haven't used it very much, so that might change should I start using it. On the flip side, an AV should be more about actual protection, and less about how nice the UI is. any other the three I mentioned currently pass my personal criteria. I'll be linking a tutorial in my signature, showing how I would go about choosing an AV. It's lengthy, but that way people can see what I do for picking my "Top X" AV software recommendations. Usually takes me about 10 minutes to pick a small chunk, based on AVC's reports lol.

Edit: I've asked AVC if there's a possibility of being sent copies of unpublished test results (aka any test results from software that doesn't make the cut for their usual reports). While I'm sure many are under an NDA, to prevent companies from looking poor in lab tests, I asked for any copies, rough or finalised, that may be given out by request. If possible, I'm going to see about regular requests, or a sort of email subscription for this; depends on what my response is. If there are any findings worth sharing, I'll be sure to post it up... as long as a sticky is made for this kind of information. If I'm given a green light to post up internal reports on AV testing, I'll want that stuff to be easily available for everyone when I do post it

Keep us updated on the info

Also if you were to pair an AV with malwarebytes premium, hitmanpro, and super anti spyware...Would the opinion scanners catch "most" of the malware, viruses, trojans, worms that the AV itself would miss etc......I want to hear your thoughts on this

 

[Joseph DeGarmo]

So did the ratings shift during the past several months? I've been using Kaspersky and all of a sudden, I've had issues with random network disconnects which was apparently resolved by reinstalling Windows. So was there a malicious file somewhere that Kaspersky knew nothing about? I scanned my external hard drive using Bitdefender free and it found what looked like infected files, but the files should be safe. Should I jump on the Bitdefender bandwagon, then?

Depends on where you get your testing information? And, quite honestly, when it comes to ranking an AV, test results would vary every day, in a true real world test environment. Due to the fact that lab testing is done ONLY with known vulnerabilities that should be covered as is, with each new vulnerability found, one AV may stand out for a few weeks, or maybe months, depending on what kind of exploit/backdoor/etc. there may be, and who manages to patch their AV first.

As far as rankings go with lab testing, results are mostly published once or twice a year, from the sources I've seen, and that is usually what you want to go off for an overall AV. Right now, using my personal criteria, BD, Kaspersky, and ESET seem to have the best ranking scores for minimal user interaction, false flags, false alarms, and overall protection (using AV Comparatives for test results). So far, they're the best place for in depth lab results, so I mainly use them for my personal ranks/scale.

From what I've read about BD and Kasp, I'd pick BD over Kasp any day, because most people seem to have a more paranoid security software with Kasp. Not really heard much about ESET, and I'm not that impressed with their GUI, so I'd personally stick with BD. Also, I haven't used it very much, so that might change should I start using it. On the flip side, an AV should be more about actual protection, and less about how nice the UI is. any other the three I mentioned currently pass my personal criteria. I'll be linking a tutorial in my signature, showing how I would go about choosing an AV. It's lengthy, but that way people can see what I do for picking my "Top X" AV software recommendations. Usually takes me about 10 minutes to pick a small chunk, based on AVC's reports lol.

Edit: I've asked AVC if there's a possibility of being sent copies of unpublished test results (aka any test results from software that doesn't make the cut for their usual reports). While I'm sure many are under an NDA, to prevent companies from looking poor in lab tests, I asked for any copies, rough or finalised, that may be given out by request. If possible, I'm going to see about regular requests, or a sort of email subscription for this; depends on what my response is. If there are any findings worth sharing, I'll be sure to post it up... as long as a sticky is made for this kind of information. If I'm given a green light to post up internal reports on AV testing, I'll want that stuff to be easily available for everyone when I do post it

So will Bitdefender free be enough? Or should I get the subscription version?

 

[Theminecraftaddict555]

So did the ratings shift during the past several months? I've been using Kaspersky and all of a sudden, I've had issues with random network disconnects which was apparently resolved by reinstalling Windows. So was there a malicious file somewhere that Kaspersky knew nothing about? I scanned my external hard drive using Bitdefender free and it found what looked like infected files, but the files should be safe. Should I jump on the Bitdefender bandwagon, then?

Depends on where you get your testing information? And, quite honestly, when it comes to ranking an AV, test results would vary every day, in a true real world test environment. Due to the fact that lab testing is done ONLY with known vulnerabilities that should be covered as is, with each new vulnerability found, one AV may stand out for a few weeks, or maybe months, depending on what kind of exploit/backdoor/etc. there may be, and who manages to patch their AV first.

As far as rankings go with lab testing, results are mostly published once or twice a year, from the sources I've seen, and that is usually what you want to go off for an overall AV. Right now, using my personal criteria, BD, Kaspersky, and ESET seem to have the best ranking scores for minimal user interaction, false flags, false alarms, and overall protection (using AV Comparatives for test results). So far, they're the best place for in depth lab results, so I mainly use them for my personal ranks/scale.

From what I've read about BD and Kasp, I'd pick BD over Kasp any day, because most people seem to have a more paranoid security software with Kasp. Not really heard much about ESET, and I'm not that impressed with their GUI, so I'd personally stick with BD. Also, I haven't used it very much, so that might change should I start using it. On the flip side, an AV should be more about actual protection, and less about how nice the UI is. any other the three I mentioned currently pass my personal criteria. I'll be linking a tutorial in my signature, showing how I would go about choosing an AV. It's lengthy, but that way people can see what I do for picking my "Top X" AV software recommendations. Usually takes me about 10 minutes to pick a small chunk, based on AVC's reports lol.

Edit: I've asked AVC if there's a possibility of being sent copies of unpublished test results (aka any test results from software that doesn't make the cut for their usual reports). While I'm sure many are under an NDA, to prevent companies from looking poor in lab tests, I asked for any copies, rough or finalised, that may be given out by request. If possible, I'm going to see about regular requests, or a sort of email subscription for this; depends on what my response is. If there are any findings worth sharing, I'll be sure to post it up... as long as a sticky is made for this kind of information. If I'm given a green light to post up internal reports on AV testing, I'll want that stuff to be easily available for everyone when I do post it

So will Bitdefender free be enough? Or should I get the subscription version?

Sky has said before that he believes that the free version's detection and protection is the same as the paid versions

 

[Skylyne]

Keep us updated on the info

Let's just say that I learned a few things, but this is to be considered an off the record source. Let's just say the information has been verified. Take my word on it or not, but I firmly believe it.

- Webroot has been performing poorly in all big lab tests, which is why we do not see it in any major lab publications for review.
- Qihoo has not been in the AVC labs public reports due to "misbehaviour," which leads me to believe the Chinese government was trying to release the test results only under a form of NDA agreement.It's been suspected they have very friendly ties with the software company, and the software has many security problems because of this.

Also if you were to pair an AV with malwarebytes premium, hitmanpro, and super anti spyware...Would the opinion scanners catch "most" of the malware, viruses, trojans, worms that the AV itself would miss etc......I want to hear your thoughts on this

Fun fact: practically every computer that is connected to the internet, EVER, will be infected with a form of malware for a period of time. Pick an AV and an AM, live AV protection, weekly AM scans. Anything more than that is truly overkill for what you actually prevent.

So will Bitdefender free be enough? Or should I get the subscription version?

As I've said before, if all you need is an antivirus, the free option from Bitdefender is probably the best choice on the internet (that I'm aware of). For anything more than AV, I'd recommend paying for an AV that has what you need. Don't skimp on AV performance though. For a full security suite, always pay for it. There are a few choices you can't go wrong with.

Sky has said before that he believes that the free version's detection and protection is the same as the paid versions

More like I know that's how it's programmed lol, but basically

I've been saying this a lot the past week, and I think some people here should know this phrase too. "If you knew everything that I know, you'd be forced to either slowly stop caring about your personal security, for survival reasons, or avoid computers like the plague." I'm not even joking. I know that Google makes roughly $50k for the gmail account that I signed up with on here, and my new Google Wallet card will probably make them more than twice that in a few years. Knowing this, it creates a moral dilemma that makes you realise that living with this 24/7 bought and psycho-analysed surveillance is probably one day going to lead to a fucked up way of income. And I'm okay with that. And I am not okay with that. At all. Doing my part to keep the crazies at bay, though. The entire internet will one day be run by an advertising company. I'll bet everything on that. At this point my future in computer security will one day truly be obsolete.

Yeah... that's what I think about when people want to know about what goes on in my head with computer security. Thought it was slightly relevant? Can't hate me for not knowing why I take AV software the way I do now lol. Enjoy.

Bu yeah, BD free is cool for a basic AV. If you computer might have some infection, though, or there's a decent Windows issue (ie: file system problem, registry errors galore, etc.) BD's AV will barely function correctly. I've installed it on maybe 3 computers, and was only told to fix one of them. BD's free version is touchy with computers that aren't 100%. And that's funny because I modify my Windows distro a fair amount, and have no problem running it whatsoever. Guess I'll ditch Webroot tonight, and just run BD again on this machine. Why not? I'll run with the best of them for a few months haha.

 

[Theminecraftaddict555]

So I should have a basic AV and AM, an AV that has real time protection, and an antimalware scan each week or two weeks or whatever correct?

*BTW is Bitdefender's 60 second virus scanner a live AV scanner?*

 

[Skylyne]

So I should have a basic AV and AM, an AV that has real time protection, and an antimalware scan each week or two weeks or whatever correct?

That's pretty much accurate. Realistically, there's not going to be anything else that gives you much more protection. I mean, you could pay for a basic AV/firewall/etc., like BD or Kaspersky, then run MBAM once a week, and you'll be good. No real need for more. It's genuinely a bit overkill for people who are sceptical on the internet, but that's where the diminishing returns will start to kick in.

*BTW is Bitdefender's 60 second virus scanner a live AV scanner?*

If you mean typical scanning of active processes, looking for odd behaviour (like heuristics), then that's basically what it is, yes. Going to run it, as I just found that last night lol. I switched to BD's free AV yesterday, since Webroot is not what you'd want for quality protection right not. I'll be posting another interesting email for you guys in a little bit

Fun side note: I'm going to bitch out every Geek Squad member from now on. Just troll them hard about how they push Webroot like a mofo. I know people who have it because of that. Personally, I have it because I got a 1 yr sub for only like $5 lmfao

Second side note: Still working on internal AV testing results. I'll see what I can dig up, and from where.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

Hi everyone have been out for awhile , had surgery on my neck , glad to see the thread is still kicking.

 

[Skylyne]

Got this response when asking for clarification on Webroot's test scores, as well as why Qihoo hasn't appeared lately.

How Webroot scored in the past.
Apparently, Webroot's protection is quite low, even with their older testing. I find that strange, since a few places that have claimed to test them gave it great reviews. Can't remember which websites I saw testing done, though. Either way, Avast is probably way better (and most everyone knows I hate Avast with a burning passion lol).

This is why Qihoo is no longer in test results from the big 3 labs.
Basically, get rid of Qihoo, if you have it. They have a poor history with tampering with computers with Qihoo installed, but not necessarily with regular users. Bottom line, I am inclined to believe that there is some sort of RAT most likely included in Qihoo, and the company using that RAT has spawned a few articles. I did post at least of them on the forum, though I'm unsure which thread it was in.

There are also other reviews that were discontinued for unknown reasons. I'll be looking into this a bit more. Take what you want from these emails, of course, but you should definitely stick with an AV that has been tested by a bigger name lab, and be very picky with them.

 

[Theminecraftaddict555]

So I should have a basic AV and AM, an AV that has real time protection, and an antimalware scan each week or two weeks or whatever correct?

That's pretty much accurate. Realistically, there's not going to be anything else that gives you much more protection. I mean, you could pay for a basic AV/firewall/etc., like BD or Kaspersky, then run MBAM once a week, and you'll be good. No real need for more. It's genuinely a bit overkill for people who are sceptical on the internet, but that's where the diminishing returns will start to kick in.

*BTW is Bitdefender's 60 second virus scanner a live AV scanner?*

If you mean typical scanning of active processes, looking for odd behaviour (like heuristics), then that's basically what it is, yes. Going to run it, as I just found that last night lol. I switched to BD's free AV yesterday, since Webroot is not what you'd want for quality protection right not. I'll be posting another interesting email for you guys in a little bit

Fun side note: I'm going to bitch out every Geek Squad member from now on. Just troll them hard about how they push Webroot like a mofo. I know people who have it because of that. Personally, I have it because I got a 1 yr sub for only like $5 lmfao

Second side note: Still working on internal AV testing results. I'll see what I can dig up, and from where.

Screw Geek Squad..I heard that they charged you over 500 dollars for a HDD fix

I'm simply using MB premium...Then using hitmanpro and super anti spyware as second opinion scanners

 

[Skylyne]

Yeah, Hitman is a good second opinion software, though I find that it doesn't work as well as MBAM for most things. I remember scanning with Hitman a few times on various computers, and MBAM right after... MBAM found a few things that were not PUP/etc. that were potentially malicious. Hitman is a nice program for the older stuff, I think.

As far as a weekly scanner for 0-day and newer exploits, MBAM. Hitman seems to pick up the stuff that's already taken care of in some of the antivirus programs, which tells me they're a bit behind.

 

[Theminecraftaddict555]

Yeah, Hitman is a good second opinion software, though I find that it doesn't work as well as MBAM for most things. I remember scanning with Hitman a few times on various computers, and MBAM right after... MBAM found a few things that were not PUP/etc. that were potentially malicious. Hitman is a nice program for the older stuff, I think.

As far as a weekly scanner for 0-day and newer exploits, MBAM. Hitman seems to pick up the stuff that's already taken care of in some of the antivirus programs, which tells me they're a bit behind.

Ah good to know, how about anti super spyware?

 

[Skylyne]

My first impression is that it reminds me of most flashy freeware out there. I'm sure it's effective to a certain point, but I'd dismiss it. I've never seen a true freeware that could keep up with the big companies. The resources just aren't there. Now, depending on who you trust, the few places that I've seen review this ware at are typically paid to do reviews (well, that is illegal, but it's common practice with major "review" sites).

Personally, I've never had MBAM pick up anything really harmful on my personal computers (similar to almost every AV I've run), so I really can't say if it would be worth anything. According to BD and MBAM, my compy is clean (which means little for someone like myself). If I ran it for a little while, I might be able to trigger a few things, but I don't have any quality samples to run by it.

From what I've seen, it's a project that just never got big enough. That's my take, though.

 

[Alpha3031]

Just reinstalled XP on a old latitude D630. Any suggestion on (free) on-access scanner? I'm currently looking at Avira. (along with MBAM, MBAE, EMET, Spybot and all that. I wonder if I should get a 3rd party firewall.)

 

[Guest]

would antivirus be able to give the needed security protection on an operating system that is no longer supported.
i would run linux on your dell latitude d630 as it does well on older hardware etc. linux lite 2.2 long term support until 2019. just food for thought.

the poorguy

 

[Theminecraftaddict555]

My first impression is that it reminds me of most flashy freeware out there. I'm sure it's effective to a certain point, but I'd dismiss it. I've never seen a true freeware that could keep up with the big companies. The resources just aren't there. Now, depending on who you trust, the few places that I've seen review this ware at are typically paid to do reviews (well, that is illegal, but it's common practice with major "review" sites).

Personally, I've never had MBAM pick up anything really harmful on my personal computers (similar to almost every AV I've run), so I really can't say if it would be worth anything. According to BD and MBAM, my compy is clean (which means little for someone like myself). If I ran it for a little while, I might be able to trigger a few things, but I don't have any quality samples to run by it.

From what I've seen, it's a project that just never got big enough. That's my take, though.

You could do or continue the project in a VM....but I won't be surprised if you don't have the technology or knowledge to do that since it is a little complicated and you need a very good possibly high end computer to do it.....Which I don't have

 

[Guest]

hey SR-71 Blackbird welcome back. hope all is good and do what your doctor tells you.

the poorguy

 

[Theminecraftaddict555]

BTW I've been wondering since Tom's hardware has chosen Avira AV to be the best AV of this year...How is it doing right now?

 

[Skylyne]

Just reinstalled XP on a old latitude D630. Any suggestion on (free) on-access scanner? I'm currently looking at Avira. (along with MBAM, MBAE, EMET, Spybot and all that. I wonder if I should get a 3rd party firewall.)

Drop WinXP, or pay for your security suite. There is no free service that can properly protect you, and even paid suites are going to be dropping XP protection within the next few years. Not to mention, they can't be held liable for anything, and using an outdated OS on a machine that has any internet traffic is a terrible idea. Hell, going with Vista is better, and no one would recommend it.

Honestly, just look for a new OS asap. Forget the AV search, because it just won't work. If you want proof, I can probably do some video footage of how fucked up my parents' computer is. They have WinXP, and it's slower now than when it was my sister's computer almost 10 years ago... with Avast, and practically no high resource demanding software installed. WinXP is a bad idea. Otherwise, I'd be running it right now, and telling you what AV to install. Just wait for Microsoft to (hopefully) release the source code, so we can get security updates.

i would run linux on your dell latitude d630 as it does well on older hardware etc. linux lite 2.2 long term support until 2019. just food for thought.

the poorguy

Linux is one of those operating systems that just isn't friendly to every computer user. I like it, but even I need help with it from time to time. The way I see it: if someone isn't running Linux right now, they probably have no use for it lol.

You could do or continue the project in a VM....but I won't be surprised if you don't have the technology or knowledge to do that since it is a little complicated and you need a very good possibly high end computer to do it.....Which I don't have

What's the point of working on a project that I don't have interest in? Or for that matter, that I'm not going to even get paid for? I do like testing out software, but no interest in ones that genuinely look like cookie cutter software that's designed to rip off customers. If they gave me a license, and asked me to do a full written report, I'd be interested... for about $5k lmao. Then I can build my new tower, and have extra for living expenses while I put their software through hell hahaha.

BTW I've been wondering since Tom's hardware has chosen Avira AV to be the best AV of this year...How is it doing right now?

Well, depending on what kind of criteria you have, it may/may not be doing to well. It isn't in my top three right now, but I can make up a ranking for you lol. I'll probably make a list of the software on AVC today, and rank them according to my personal criteria. Today or tomorrow... haven't decided. It's probably going to take me about 3 hours to comb through the reports, another hour or so to work the animated graph and make rankings, and probably another 2 hours to sort everything out, put categories into order, and make a real list. I will probably have a few lists when I'm done, since not every AV is tested in each area.

I'll get to it... during the coming week at the latest. I need something to do when I'm not at work lmfao.

 

[Skylyne]

As a side note: I just sent an email to Dennis Labs. From what I see, they're probably somewhere along the lines of AV Test or Virus BTN, but I've yet to see where they stack up. Anyone have a word on how legit these guys are?

Asked them to provide some comprehensive reports, as their PDF reports are genuinely shit. They're like 15 page PC Mag reviews, where nothing is said or explained, and products are given ratings/etc. with no explanation as to how it happened. Guys, there's a reason I go to AVC first. I need facts to check, should the reports/tests ever come into question.

Obviously, that doesn't mean AVC is 100% reliable (everyone should be sceptical). However, when they're the only lab that seems to publish these test results, I think it's safe to take them relatively serious. I'm currently working on a very interesting proposal for AVC, so hopefully I have some good news this coming week. No promises (it is a long shot), but let's see what happens. I'm getting tired of common AV wares not being included in their reports

 

[Guest]

come on Skylyne linux is not hard to use, maybe it is the computer user that isn't friendly to linux. and by the way i like vista and still use it.

i know alot of people refuse to give up their windows xp and keep using it. some have problems and some don't and i agree no antivirus is going to make it safe to use.

the poorguy

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

Thanks poorguy , hopefully feel better soon.

 

[Skylyne]

come on Skylyne linux is not hard to use, maybe it is the computer user that isn't friendly to linux. and by the way i like vista and still use it.

Linux is one of those operating systems that just isn't friendly to every computer user.

I never said i t was hard to use, I simply stated that it isn't user friendly to everyone

i know alot of people refuse to give up their windows xp and keep using it. some have problems and some don't and i agree no antivirus is going to make it safe to use.

Yeah, it can be used without much security compromise, but it's going to be one of those things that just isn't entirely a good idea. I could probably still use it without any real risk, but that's something I just don't feel like doing. That would be way too much work lol.

Still waiting on emails from the labs, but it is still the weekend. I was surprised I got emails on a Saturday from AVC. Anyone interested in hearing some comprehensive reviews on AV software, but ones that rank it by end-user experience level? Basically, if an AV is best suitable for a new user, it goes into a Level 1 AV ranking, and more advanced users would be a Level 4 AV. Something like that. Anyone have some ideas to toss around?

 

[Guest]

hey Skylyne,

just giving you hell about linux i know it isn't for everyone.

the poorguy

 

[Skylyne]

Just clarifying for the simpletons lol

 

[Turb0Yoda]

Gotta love Linux. We'd be nowhere without it. That said, I have used Avast, Webroot, and Norton, both free and paid versions. Webroot did the best(when I was younger and played a lot of flash based stuff. Now, Avast(free) is enough because I am a hell of a lot more careful of what I do.