Expired Antivirus Protection Just as Bad as None

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Glad I invested in Malwarebytes years ago when it was $25 (for a life time subscription) or $20 per copy if you bought 3 or more.

Have not looked back. Malwarebytes is just as if not more capable than the big names. In its infancy it was extremely light weight and found things that the bloated norton and macafee could not find. It was not invasive either, it just got rid of things and thats it.

Lately malwarebytes has gotten bigger and flashier, its a shame. However, I still have a lifetime copy, which to my knowledge, is no longer available. It still kicks the crap out of pretty much anything despite its modern makeover that I dislike.


OO and I forgot to mention, the free version is just as good as the paid version. You simply have to manually do a scan rather than relying on it to do things for you. This is my favorite way to go anyways. Skip free AVG, AVAST, Avir, norton, etc. Ive tried them all and I still stick with Malwarebytes.
 
Pretty funny coming from a company that relies on you to manually update Windows Defender every day. (Unless you have automatic updates on. Which is honestly annoying).
 
@Silent Ricochet in short new nasty viruses come out almost every day so Windows Defender has a update that often but also it is probably gathering infomation about how well it works on your machine sending what is in the "system" screen, what version of windows defender it is, and then it will give you the update for windows defender as the first 2 things are gathered by any and all software to make sure they give you the correct update(s) even though a little intrusive.
 
Microsoft's 'firewall' is often referred instead to as an 'open door'; anyone tried/tinkered with Personalfirewall 7.0? (Seems easy enough so far; nonintrusive, yet informative little popups every time something 'new' occurs, inbound or outbound, for those that are curious and/or paranoid!)
 
I use Avast and Malwarebytes. Free versions of both that are perfectly functional. And these are the least resource-hungry of all the antivirus/malware solutions out there. I don't see why people use need or use anything else.
 
The best anti-virus is always yourself (if you're competent). Best of all, it doesn't horrendously tax your hardware, or spy on you.

Signed, 15 years virus free with MeMyself&I AV hardware
 
It's not that difficult to see what's on your computer. I can see and check everything from files to processes to registry entries to program/file network usage to everything else you can think of. If you know what viruses do, it's easy to spot them without anti-virus.

 
I think he's trolling, photon... I've used Avast free and a firewall for years now without incident. I like Avast because it has the boot-time-scan which is about as good as it gets once you ARE infected. The firewall is great for PREVENTING infections, I've used PCTools FW and Komodo FW with great results. Although the big issue is preventing infection in the first place, and that needs up-to-date definitions....
 
I'm not trolling at all. I'm sharing my experiences. To each their own. If you feel as though you're so unsafe that you need an anti-virus, by all means, use it. I however am comfortable performing basic and advanced tasks on the internet without an anti-virus, and have had no problems without one, and am VERY confident in my decision making skills on the internet (IE what to click, what not to click, what looks suspicious, which ads are fake, and not to download mp3's that end in .exe, etc.). In my experience, they create more problems than they solve, whether they be free or pay.
 
This is a thread for non-power users otherwise...
Isn't the obvious answer just run Linux? Get a good Redhat distro with support, take a few classes in sys admin and you're good to go! Also who needs a GUI when you have tools like VI? lol...
 
"Get a good Redhat distro with support, take a few classes in sys admin and you're good to go! Also who needs a GUI" to "run Linux"
You have some extremely wild imagination kid.
 
I see a real false sense of security in several posts. A little research will show you some actual numbers. here's one of many sources:

MS Security Essentials - Ouch (0 / 6 rating)
http://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-7/august-2014/microsoft-security-essentials-4.5-143171/

Avast - Better (3 / 6 rating)
http://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-7/august-2014/avast-free-antivirus-2014-143113/

Comparative List
http://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-7/august-2014/

Useless ?, tell that to the peeps who have lost valuable information or paid $100's of dollars to have their machines restored. I have disinfected people's PCs and reported infections to their AV software providers that they denied existed .... for 3-4 days, then they admitted that they missed a new one.

It's not a matter of just being competent and careful, what matters is is everyone you know or come in contact with careful and competent. 9/10 Windows PCs I am asked to look at because of resource or slowness issues are infected. Just last week (11/11) I downloaded a software update for a utility I have been using for ten years. It had a infection which my software detected .... luckily, what I was using was 1 of only 3 programs that were then capable of picking it up.

https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/d8d339b26e68ac6e6ac6e5fe1d53a0274de3bfe1ea35c4b2d4aca5885386b6fa/analysis/

Now there are 9 programs capable of picking it up. With 0 day attacks, you are only as safe as your vendor's ability to update their definition files and / or the capability of their Hueristic abilities.

As far as the lifetime subscription to Malware Bytes .... still available for $20 (1 PC) single purchase
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom