What are you guys using for Antivirus protection these days?

Having used AVG for a long time I've recently switched over to Microsoft Security Essentials, more to try it out and see how it performs more than anything. I've been very pleased with it so far.
 
spugnor said:
I find it funny that people don't think that antivirus software is necessary. I thought this kind of thinking went out the window years ago. My antivirus software (avast) goes off all the time, on what i used to consider "safe" sites to visit. Malware is ever evolving, and it's not just porn or warez sites that have problems.

Ad based attacks are just one example, and LOTS of sites have ads. Pretty much any modern system has so much excess processing power you're not going to notice antivirus running unless you tell it to do a full scan on every boot.
Click to expand...


No dude, didn't you hear? We have experts in here that think just being "safe" while browsing is good enough. Clearly we are wrong. :rolleyes:
 
Even Mac users are starting to need an Antivirus, fact is it is stupid not to have one...those that dont tend to be the ones that spread and make them worse for the rest of us as well. A good AV will not slow your computer and only bugs you when there is an issue. There are plenty that are free as well that are good and thus really no reason not to have one. There just is no advantage to not having an AV software package these days IMO.

Period.
 
Grentz said:
Even Mac users are starting to need an Antivirus, fact is it is stupid not to have one...those that dont tend to be the ones that spread and make them worse for the rest of us as well. A good AV will not slow your computer and only bugs you when there is an issue. There are plenty that are free as well that are good and thus really no reason not to have one. There just is no advantage to not having an AV software package these days IMO.

Period.
Click to expand...

Thing is, I have yet to find a good AV app for the Mac. I know many exist, but most are pretty rubbish.
 
I use ClamAV but I don't let it start up with Windows. I only use it about once a week to scan the whole machine overnight.
 
atto said:
I use ClamAV but I don't let it start up with Windows. I only use it about once a week to scan the whole machine overnight.
Click to expand...

Because there's nothing that does start up with Windows...Clam for Windows does not have any real time protection.

Detection rate is quite low...only in the low 80% range. That means it's missing nearly 1 in 5 buggers it scans.
 
I use Norton Internet Security 2010. Symantec has had a bad rap over the years for its resource hogging. But they've vastly improved that and its VERY quick efficient now.

Its the only one I'll use on my Windows boxes, even my gaming rig.
 
I've demoed several anti-virus apps and not a single one has ever caught something. Just goes to show that YES BEING A SMART user helps.
 
Cerulean said:
I've gone 6+ months without anti-virus, and guess how many virii/spyware/malware counts I have?

None.

Used Spybot Search & Destroy, CCleaner, SpywareBlaster, Housecall (housecall.trendmicro.com), and NOD32 (eset.com/onlinescan).
Click to expand...

Sounds like me :) Just ignore the people who talk shit to you, obviously they know every thing about how you use your computer :)
 
Using Avira free.

Thinking about trying out F-Secure or G Data. Anyone have any experience with these two?
 
I have been using Avira for a few years now and am very happy with it, but I just installed Microsoft security essentials and am even happier.
 
I am currently use NOD32 but when that expires, I will probably switch over to MSE.
 
spugnor said:
Ad based attacks are just one example, and LOTS of sites have ads.
Click to expand...

Browsing Gizmodo yesterday and had NOD block some nastiness..... it is mind boggling that there are some that still think AV is unnecessary....
 
well, tried finding my nod subscription info (for migrating to 7) with no luck, so now I'm using MSE... so far so good :) seems fairly lightweight
 
This is why I run antiviurs software.



The only thing I had open was Yahoo Music, [H]ard|Forum, and Wikipedia. I was in the middle of reading a thread and that popped up. You do not have to be doing anything to get attacked.
 
I'm still with Symantec but on MSE on my other PC's. Not a single person likes symantec. Why? How much more overhead does it have and how unreliable is it compared to MSE?
 
Shadow2531 said:
Did you investigate what you'd have to do with that file to actually trigger the exploit embedded in it? If so, do any of the methods found apply to you?
Click to expand...

That wasn't my point. It could have been anything else that tripped MSE.. My point was that I wasn't doing anything to trigger it.
 
ryan_975 said:
That wasn't my point. It could have been anything else that tripped MSE.. My point was that I wasn't doing anything to trigger it.
Click to expand...

OK. My point was that it was nice that MSE detected a cache file that had exploit code in it, but that in this case (a browser cache file), you probably weren't in any danger anyway. In other words, it appears that MSE just detected the trace of an exploit in the file, not the exploit being activated.

The sub-point of that is that the file getting on your system in this case was just the result of browser caching, which is automatic itself. It doesn't look like the file got on your computer automatically via a vulnerability or bad security design in Firefox.

In other words, I don't think that in this case, it's a good example of automatic and I doubt that MSE saved your life so to speak in this case. That's all. It may be in other cases though.

In other words, it's good to keep your AV in check so that you don't think it's doing amazing things in cases when it's really not. Otherwise, you may feel you need it more than you actually do. (This might not matter to people on here, but it can make average users think an AV is all there is too be safe.)

Also, if Yahoo Music, [H]ard|Forum, or Wikipedia appear to have something nasty embedded in some of their content, it might be best to confirm from another computer and make sure you're not infected with something that's injecting it. If you are infected with something else, you can evaluate how that got on there, if you even care how of course.
 
Avira AntiVir, the free one.

I used to use AVG but I went to AVG per better results. But both catch things the other misses.

Oh and to all those whining and moaning about ram use. I just don't get it. Ram is so cheap these days. Get over it. Seriously.
 
Is it still a general rule of thumb to use both AV and some kind of anti spy/ad-ware software?

What's the anti spy/ad-ware with the super small footprint? I used ad-ware pro in the past and liked that it had a registry edit blocker.
 
Pacificfarm said:
Is it still a general rule of thumb to use both AV and some kind of anti spy/ad-ware software?

What's the anti spy/ad-ware with the super small footprint? I used ad-ware pro in the past and liked that it had a registry edit blocker.
Click to expand...

I've been using comodo firewall and that has a built in system protection called 'Defense+' that, more or less, does the same thing (blocks software from editing critical files and/or the registry). However, I usually keep it off as it's more annoying than anything.. except if I'm using software or on a webpage that I don't trust

NoScript + Firefox and a good AV should be more than enough for a majority of the time though
 
ryan_975 said:
This is why I run antiviurs software.



The only thing I had open was Yahoo Music, [H]ard|Forum, and Wikipedia. I was in the middle of reading a thread and that popped up. You do not have to be doing anything to get attacked.
Click to expand...

No way dude, being "safe" should work well enough. :rolleyes: ;)

Shadow2531 said:
OK. My point was that it was nice that MSE detected a cache file that had exploit code in it, but that in this case (a browser cache file), you probably weren't in any danger anyway. In other words, it appears that MSE just detected the trace of an exploit in the file, not the exploit being activated.

The sub-point of that is that the file getting on your system in this case was just the result of browser caching, which is automatic itself. It doesn't look like the file got on your computer automatically via a vulnerability or bad security design in Firefox.

In other words, I don't think that in this case, it's a good example of automatic and I doubt that MSE saved your life so to speak in this case. That's all. It may be in other cases though.

In other words, it's good to keep your AV in check so that you don't think it's doing amazing things in cases when it's really not. Otherwise, you may feel you need it more than you actually do. (This might not matter to people on here, but it can make average users think an AV is all there is too be safe.)

Also, if Yahoo Music, [H]ard|Forum, or Wikipedia appear to have something nasty embedded in some of their content, it might be best to confirm from another computer and make sure you're not infected with something that's injecting it. If you are infected with something else, you can evaluate how that got on there, if you even care how of course.
Click to expand...

So what's your argument then? That we don't need AV? Because from everything you've said it sounds like you're taking a stance against bothering with them. It's better to be safe than sorry. Maybe nothing was actually going to be executed, but that just shows how awesome an AV like MSE is; it caught something before it even had the chance to do any potential damage.
 
Last edited:
Just the other day I switched from Avira free to MSE. I keep reading good things about MSE and I like the fact that there are no annoying pop ups. I have never had an infection, but I would never browse around on the internet without an AV program. Just the other day on a car forum I frequent, an ad was automatically redirecting browsers to unknown sites. I do like UAC as another layer of protection in case something trys to install. UAC is a good thing and worth the minor annoyance.
 
Pacificfarm said:
Is it still a general rule of thumb to use both AV and some kind of anti spy/ad-ware software?

What's the anti spy/ad-ware with the super small footprint? I used ad-ware pro in the past and liked that it had a registry edit blocker.
Click to expand...

Comodo D+ is kind of annoying, and you REALLY need to investigate every single popup, but for the anal retentive, it's amazing. I personally prefer an anti-spyware like Superantispyware or Malwarebytes Antimalware, along with a behavior blocker like threatfire or Prevx.
 
Jon55 said:
So what's your argument then?
Click to expand...

If you're dealing with a user that's getting infected all the time, installing an AV is the *last* piece of the puzzle.

It's possible to teach an average user how to not activate infections in the cache file case mentioned.

If a trusted site appears to be infected, try to get the site to investigate instead of just letting AV catch it.

If you've seen one user get infected like hell all the time and another never get infected, you'll know that it has little to do with chance.

So, to be straight-up on what I mean: I'm not against AV. I'm against using it as an excuse to be stupid (Not saying that about anyone in particular here) because even AV won't help the stupid.
 
But, anyway, I like AVG Free resident shield running while scanning with Spybot. It catches things trying to dodge spybot. I also prefer Avast over others for startup scans.

As for just protection purposes, I prefer AVG free with no res shield and no link, email and search scanning.
 
AVG is quite popular amongst the home users that know enough to find a free AV program. We come across quite a few PCs with it installed, PCs that come to us for fixing...often infested with malware because too much slips past AVG, see it time and time and time again. Today I'm cleaning up a guys laptop that had AVG "protecting it"...got hit with the CyberDefender as well as Windows Police Alert rogue fake alert malware. Rendered installation and updating of tools useless, as well as regedit and task mangler.

Slaved it to my laptop, scanning with MSE now and the list of detected malware is huge. AVG never batted an eyelash.
 
ShadowJack2531 said:
OK. My point was that it was nice that MSE detected a cache file that had exploit code in it, but that in this case (a browser cache file), you probably weren't in any danger anyway. In other words, it appears that MSE just detected the trace of an exploit in the file, not the exploit being activated.

The sub-point of that is that the file getting on your system in this case was just the result of browser caching, which is automatic itself. It doesn't look like the file got on your computer automatically via a vulnerability or bad security design in Firefox.

In other words, I don't think that in this case, it's a good example of automatic and I doubt that MSE saved your life so to speak in this case. That's all. It may be in other cases though.

In other words, it's good to keep your AV in check so that you don't think it's doing amazing things in cases when it's really not. Otherwise, you may feel you need it more than you actually do. (This might not matter to people on here, but it can make average users think an AV is all there is too be safe.)

Also, if Yahoo Music, [H]ard|Forum, or Wikipedia appear to have something nasty embedded in some of their content, it might be best to confirm from another computer and make sure you're not infected with something that's injecting it. If you are infected with something else, you can evaluate how that got on there, if you even care how of course.
Click to expand...

You do understand that it really doesn't matter HOW the exploit code gets on your system, once it is there, it can typically be activated remotely, depending on the exploit. If you think you are safe just because exploit code can only get on your system through browser caching, I have a couple websites i want to send you to. I could do with some new credit card info...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top