Suggest me a security suite! (urgently needed)

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rangan Das

Rangan Das

Honorable
Apr 28, 2013
150
0
10,690
So, the 2015 versions of the security suites are being released and I am badly in need of one for my desktop. I have tons of projects, college work and documents that I just cannot afford to lose.

I was using Malwarebytes Anti-Malware that I purchased long back. I upgraded, but it was not worth it. Even, Windows Defender on my Windows 8.1 Enterprise Ed detected a malware that Malwarebytes completely skipped. I had to get rid of it using Bitdefender's 60 second scanner. Windows is also kept updated.

My activities include a lot of work involving Adobe Photoshop, Lightroom and Illustrator. Then, there is Visual Studio, JDK, Hyper-V and more. Most of them take up a lot of resources (I mostly run Visual Studio and Illustrator in parallel). So, I need an Anti-Virus, or maybe a security solution (yes, I do most of my shopping online).

Until now, I have never needed an AV as Windows Defender and Malwarebytes used to do a good job. However, my system got attacked by a FakeChrome Trojan (I do not even use Chrome, mostly Firefox and IE11) and now, I feel the need to get a good AV that will not slow down my system.

So, I need a suggestion. In terms of budget, I can spend upto 5,000INR or maybe, I can go a bit more. But, I must be sure that my system is totally protected. I can also spend a bit more given that it gives me peace of mind!

P.S. I have used Bitdefender Windows 8 security for a while (180 days) that I got free of cost when I purchased the Windows 8 Enterprise Edition from the store. It has expired now. Should I/Can I renew that?
Also, I play games, the newest titles, but not an avid gamer.

Config:
Windows 8.1 Enterprise Ed. (up-to-date with Update 1)
AMD FX-8320 8-core @ 4.0 GHz with CM Hyper TX-3 Cooler
AMD Radeon HD 7850 2GB DDR5
2x Kingston 4GB DDR3 RAM
HDD: 256GB + 2TB + 1TB ext.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
QuickHeal total security without doubt, I'm a VFX under graduate and use similar programs for VFX and video rendering with a lot of gaming, online shopping, browsing and stuff. I've used it for a year now and I came across no issues thus far. Its really cheap @INR 1299. My experience with Avast, Mcafee and AVG were not that pleasant though. My pick: QuickHeal Total Security 1 year single user edition. FYI I got many viruses using Avast and AVG, so they're a big no-no from me. Mcafee's internet firewall is weak. Quick Heal is very good in both terms, go for it!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I've used a fair amount of the antivirus/firewall tools out there... and, for me, nothing has beat Comodo. The real reason I like Comodo is it's the best free security suite I know of; the only thing you would ever have to pay for is their customer service. If you really need customer service, because you don't know how to run an a/v software, then Comodo won't really be too friendly to you. Personally, I don't ever use customer service, since they're usually reading from a script, or they have to remote into your machine (which I don't like, for obvious ironic security reasons), so I stick with their free security suite only. Here's a link to check out both free and paid products- Comodo PC Security

Also, any security suite you get will slow your computer; the only difference between the them is how much you notice it. For me, Comodo doesn't really take up very many resources at "idle" (meaning with a few common applications running, like chrome/IM/etc., but with no browsing traffic being transmitted). In fact, here's how much memory it uses for me. Of course, it varies from computer to computer; however, unlike many antivirus programs I've used in the past, it is a lightweight background process.
8MFoQmEg_original.png


Now, I haven't seen it slow down any programs, or games, yet, but it definitely could; just like all other security suites. The upside to Comodo is they include everything for free; auto-sandboxing, live antivirus scanning, fully customisable firewall, HIPS, a rerouted DNS for extra security, their own security enhanced browser, and a few different cloud submission analysis services. For the price of free, it's a great bargain. I'd go with that to start, and see if it works for your uses. It's a bit of a pain to get running smoothly, at the beginning; but I think it's worth it.

Get whatever fits your budget, and makes you feel the most comfortable
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I have Kaspersky Internet Security and I play games.

I have not experienced computer resources being compromised by my antivirus.

You can buy Kaspersky Internet Security 2015 for as little as $15-20 for a full year on Kijiji or eBay!

Good luck! :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
No, I'm not kidding

If youre into torrents or dodgy sites maybe yer you need one. Havent had any of this rubbish on these things for 2-3 + yrs. And never been hit by anything. I just use Win8's default programs.

IMO all of these are just a con to get you to pay money for crap

Even if you buy one , it can still get disabled. So whats the point in getting it, if it doesnt do the job properly?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I hope you're kidding too.

Even harmless companies like Canadian Tire's Credit Card system are being hacked, what makes you think you can't be?

Some viruses/malwares/worms can be hidden in your computer without you even noticing, and since you don't even have an antivirus, how do you know that your computer is not infected?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but it's not working and is totally incorrect.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Like I said most are crap. Window's one is good enough for me. Why bother with something else, that can slow it down, crash it, block things from actually running properly

Well Im not in Canada am I. I would notice. Its not that hard to find out. if you know what youre doing. And how to remove it
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


This is fairly accurate... and let me expand upon why, before you guys start thinking that he's a bit nuts.

Realistically, viruses/etc. are deployed to infect users within the first few days of being released; once patches and a/v software can prevent an infection from hitting your computer, there's no point in relying on that virus to do its job. Now, on the user end, if there is a patch released for a virus that is on the loose, and the user has it installed to prevent infection/spreading/etc., why would the user need an anti-virus as well? It's like getting a vaccine against a minor germ that your body already is immune to. Even if it doesn't hurt you, it's pointless. If have data high traffic, or you continuously download files from untrusted sources (yes, friends/family count as untrusted sources), then your only real threat is when someone hands you an infected file that exploits something you didn't patch up to begin with.

Personally, I didn't run an anti-virus software for many years until recently. The reason I started? We had a complaint from our ISP that someone was using our IP address for "unapproved traffic" (ie: abuse of port 25). Well, this came VERY suspiciously soon after I had been tinkering with a friend's computer, which was having virus problems, and I figured that was where the problem stemmed. Sure enough, after running an a/v software (Comodo), I found a couple infections; and yes, after inspecting the files, everything was installed the day I was working on that computer; nothing malicious existed on my system from before that date. After that date, I had Comodo for a short while, but uninstalled it, as it did me nothing useful. That was the first time I ever had a genuine threat to my system, and I visit plenty of places that are known to host malware. I currently run it because of my currently increased amount of data traffic, but nothing has really happened. In reality, all it's done is restrict my I2P networking, and block various homebrew/freeware software from installing. It's a pain and a half.

The reality behind a/v software is this: if you don't keep your machine up-to-date, or if you aren't in tune with your computer very well, then it's a good thing to have. Software firewalls prevent you from certain threats that are not already taken care of in your OS, usually via a patch. While an a/v software can scan for active processes, the accuracy rate isn't as reliable as many people believe. There are countless back doors that are exploited by various software companies due to the NSA, or a legal obligation, and those back doors can't always be shut with an a/v software. In fact, it should be worth noting that a/v software only notices certain types of bugs; it mainly picks up on the processes that are viewable by the user, if you know what you're doing. The problem with this is there are plenty of malicious files/etc. that work silently, in the background, and do not have any real trace of what they are doing. These are the vulnerabilities that are mostly used by government agencies, like the NSA, but are also used by the much more advanced hackers that care to look for whatever vulnerabilities they can find. If the exploit isn't brought to public attention, is being used by the government, or the exploit is via a bug in the hardware/software barrier, then covering up exploits are something that's up in the air in many different ways.

A/v software is kind of a bitter-sweet thing; it's somewhat like the TSA, only they do have a substantial success rate. If you learn how to browse the web safely, how to criticise your files right, and you use the correct security measures when downloading/sharing, you're going to be ahead/on par with most a/v software. For my purposes, my a/v is there for checking files I want a second opinion on, and to act as a firewall; Ever since installing it, I've noticed more problems with speed/etc. than when I ran no security software. When I get my new rig built, I'll probably go back to no a/v software for this reason.

Also, boryahjasper, using examples of corporations that get hacked is a poor example. When those systems get hacked, it's usually something that has been overlooked by everyone, and exploited for a short time.

As I've said before, but maybe not on here, computer security is kind of an oxymoron in the grand scheme of things.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Mac is just as vulnerable, especially with uneducated users, and Linux is much less secure for the new Unix user. Unix systems in general are more secure, but they aren't as secure as most people think; even with proper security measures in place. In reality, a "safe" computer doesn't exist. All we can do is keep our computer clean of the known crap, and keep an eye out for fishy stuff happening on our systems. What many tend to forget is that the computer isn't always the weakest link in a chain. Receiving emails, a poorly "secured" network router, or using a flash drive on an infected computer will do more harm than most know. I'm wiling to bet there are more inventive ways to get an infected computer than to make a cocktail. Also, as a quick side note, SD cards can be hacked via their microcontroller; so stay away from the cheap/potentially fake SD cards. Just thought I'd throw that in there, since many people use them.

The reason why Mac isn't so different from Windows any more is because of their increasing popularity. Programmers/hackers focus on the most abundant systems; and since the Mac computers have been rapidly increasing in numbers over the past decade, or so, they have been focusing on writing viruses for the Mac OS. It's simple supply/demand theory, accept in the hacker world. The last time it was substantially safe to have a Mac? Probably within the first few years of the Apple/Mac frenzy; however, they're just as vulnerable now as they were in the original PowerPC days, and are pretty much as vulnerable as the Windows machines today. While there are certain steps taken to prevent infections, there are ways to get around user authentications. With Linux, and the substantial user base in the corporate world (namely servers), there are definitely weaknesses and vulnerabilities out there that can cause harm.

Pick the OS that serves you best, and just try to minimise risk with what you do. You can't avoid computer viruses entirely; even if nothing shows up on every a/v scanner. That's the reality. A/v software is just a comfort thing, unless it's being used on a computer that is not kept up to date 100%; including all drivers.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I must agree with Paul NZ. It has been long since i used an antivirus suite and never have a problem, and if i ever have, it's easy to find a solution.

Those antivirus just sit there and do nothing but use resources.

I'm just careful with the e-mails i open, attachments downloads, web pages, etc. sounds like a tedious task, but i'm so used to it that i don't care.

Even with an antivirus you must be careful, the best antivirus can be overpassed, so it's about the same.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
^ To add to that, I'll also mention something interesting to many users: in all the years of running an a/v on my system, I've never had it actually stop a genuine threat. That doesn't mean that it won't work; it does mean that I don't subject myself to vulnerabilities in a way that I would need an a/v.

If you use specialised web browsers, utilise a lightweight firewall (Windows Firewall works fine for the most basic stuff), and you tune your browsing habits to be much more wary of what you click on, you shouldn't have a problem. When it comes to email attachments, I don't ever recommend opening them, unless you know the person is up-to-date with computer security. Personally, I don't use email beyond website registration, and the occasional file exchange (pictures or documents, mostly). I do not engage in casual emails, nor do I give out my email address freely; this results in less risk/exposure to emails from infected emails. Also, avoiding an email client can help with that.

There are plenty of ways to stay relatively safe without an a/v; they just take more initial effort, and require you to dedicate some time to keeping up on security measures. If you can't be bothered to do any of that, your pick of a/v software won't make too much of a difference, outside of how much it impacts your overall speed/etc..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Have previously polled the moderators on this and historically, it tends to be a matter of personal preference.

On my end, I use Avast - though I'm pretty sure for me it comes down to brand loyalty since the usability features have decayed considerably in recent years. Of note, even if you don't mess with torrenting or the darker areas of the web, you still do very much need some kind of protection on your machine. Better to be safe than sorry.

-JP
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Personally, my brand loyalty is to Panda Antivirus.

That's the only antivirus I've really seen to work properly. I know is not one of the best in ranking, but this one is my choice. When i found something weird happening in my computer that i can't solve, i installed it, delete the virus or whatever it found, and uninstalled it. This have worked for me.

Actually, thanks to this post, i'm trying the Panda Cloud Antivirus Free. It certainly doesn't consume any resources and already passed some of my virus tests (some virus/trojan files i have).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Agree with jpishgar, I use QuickHeal and never faced an issue, but on the other hand I had several viruses while using Avast and AVG. It's all about preference and what you do on your PC. Some Antiviruses tend to be better at blocking say Malware and some say Trojans or Rootkits. I'm aware of benefits of other antiviruses, but I'd still keep my opinion by suggestion QuickHeal.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom