What are you using for Win7 Internet Security Software?

C

CLock3

Gawd
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
898
I've begun using Windows 7 recently, and it's great, but the one thing I wished worked on it was Kaspersky Internet Security ver.7. What are you guys using for an internet security suite on Windows 7? Are any of you using the technical preview of Kaspersky Anti-Virus for Windows 7? If so, is it worth checking out?

I might have read somewhere that Kaspersky 2009 works, but I prefer version 7 of it, as I really like the training mode it had for the firewall, which notifies you on any internet activity and asks you what you want to do.

Thanks in advance for any help. I appreciate it. :)

EDIT: Nevermind. Ended up trying out the Kaspersky Technical Preview. Very nice so far. It's like v.7 with the training mode, so I'm happy.
 
Last edited:
I'm not running Win7 beta anymore but when I did I used the Kaspersky free trial. I liked the AV part of it but found the firewall a bit annoying. I always use just Windows firewall and my routers firewall. Then I use Avast free for AV, Malwarebytes free, Spybot, Spywareblaster, Defender, and Firefox with noscript and adblock. Now and again I run Avira anti-rootkit. That combo has always kept me safe and costs nothing.
 
Exact same thing I was using under Vista and XP SP2 before it. Windows firewall plus AVG free. Anything more than that is overkill for a personal use rig.


Lately I'm becoiming a bit disenchanted with AVG free though. Not because it's any worse than any other alternative at detecting and stopping intruders. Instead because it false reports a fair amount of the 'run from hard drive' game cracks as potential intruders, when it's really just the packaging of the crack that's triggering an alarm.
 
for now its AVG free.....once Windows 7 RTM drops I'll drop the bones for another Nod32 license.

I gave the Kapersky tech preview a whirl but it seemed to get gummed up when all I wanted was the AV and not the whole suite of apps it wanted to install :eek:
 
I don't use Anti-Virus software on my Windows 7 install. It just doesn't seem necessary, since I've been running Vista for over a year with no Anti-Virus and have yet to get a virus. (And I do scan with a passive scanner every once in a while to make sure, too)

Would I do that with Windows XP? Heck no, but Windows 7 and Windows Vista are just so much more secure, combine that with good computing/security habits and you won't have much of an issue.

If you don't feel comfortable going the same route as me, you can get one of the big three free anti-virus programs as an added cushion. AVG, Avast and Anti-Vir are all great programs.
 
AbJ32 said:
I don't use Anti-Virus software on my Windows 7 install. It just doesn't seem necessary,
Click to expand...
If you are running a Windows computer that's connected to a network or the internet, it's necessary, whether it seems like it or not. This point isn't even debatable anymore, and I'm sincerely hoping we don't have to go down this route once again.
 
DeaconFrost said:
If you are running a Windows computer that's connected to a network or the internet, it's necessary, whether it seems like it or not. This point isn't even debatable anymore, and I'm sincerely hoping we don't have to go down this route once again.
Click to expand...

But what about on a VM? I'm on board with all windows boxen *needing* at least some AV, but what about the sandbox VM's....think its not worht the time to install/resrouces wasted in a VM thats not prod.
 
If it's a VM that has network or internet access, it gets AV software as well. I'm not so sure about virtualized servers in a corporate environment, that might be sealed off from the internet, but on my own VMs, I always install AV software.
 
Router Firewall + Windows Firewall + Microsoft Security Essentials Beta for viruses.

Normally I run Avast, but trying out the new Microsoft Beta. So far so good, seems light, doesn't seem to impact system performance any.
 
Vista made security suites pretty much obsolete. The only thing you really need to run in addition to what's there is AV software, and NOD32 or Avira are the better in that area...
 
I would use Malwarebytes too as that has picked up a couple of traces of attempted malware infections that the others have missed. I don't know why I bother with Defender on Vista anymore because it has never done squat. The free version of Malwarebytes is none resident so doesn't impact performance in any way and is a popular choice on the Usenet spyware group.It's very fast at scanning too. Another free one they like is Super AntiSpyware but I don't use that one anymore.
 
guppy said:
I would use Malwarebytes too as that has picked up a couple of traces of attempted malware infections that the others have missed. I don't know why I bother with Defender on Vista anymore because it has never done squat. The free version of Malwarebytes is none resident so doesn't impact performance in any way and is a popular choice on the Usenet spyware group.It's very fast at scanning too. Another free one they like is Super AntiSpyware but I don't use that one anymore.
Click to expand...

I've been seeing that malware bytes pop up on a number of traders laptops lately...anyone else have experience with it. Thread jack whoops.
 
Nothing. I have a router with hardware firewall and spi. Then running the windows firewall but that's it. I don't open dumb stuff and use Opera for my main browser. My system stays nice and clean without bogging it down with anti viri crap. If there is a problem... re-image.... thanks Acronis.
 
dx2 said:
I've been seeing that malware bytes pop up on a number of traders laptops lately...anyone else have experience with it. Thread jack whoops.
Click to expand...
It's been a great program for quite a while, and was one of the first to completely remove the Vundu crap.
 
ferrisnox said:
Nothing. I have a router with hardware firewall and spi. Then running the windows firewall but that's it. I don't open dumb stuff and use Opera for my main browser. My system stays nice and clean without bogging it down with anti viri crap. If there is a problem... re-image.... thanks Acronis.
Click to expand...

What does spi do? How would you know if you have a virus or not if you never scan it? I don't run AV resident on Vista64 but I still scan it now and again with Avast. Every time you update Avast it scans memory too so if a virus was resident it should alert you to it. That method uses no resources and is free. I don't understand your logic in not using anything. Are you that confident in your computer skills?
 
Avast, Comodo Firewall.
Would run PG2 if it was anywhere near stable.
 
guppy said:
What does spi do? How would you know if you have a virus or not if you never scan it? I don't run AV resident on Vista64 but I still scan it now and again with Avast. Every time you update Avast it scans memory too so if a virus was resident it should alert you to it. That method uses no resources and is free. I don't understand your logic in not using anything. Are you that confident in your computer skills?
Click to expand...

FWIW - Stateful packet inspection *should* be abel to recognize any traffic that would be virus related and block/prevent it from entering or leaving the network. ....
 
I've read a couple articles on Microsoft Security Essentials and so far it seems like a great product. One site said that it detected things that Nod32 did not. When testing it on av-test.org setup another said ...
When put against AV-Test's "WildList" collection of 3,194 recent, common viruses, bots, and worms, Microsoft Security Essentials detected and removed each and every one of the malware samples. How does this compare to other security products? AV-Test coordinator Andreas Marx notes that "several other [antivirus] scanners are still not able to detect and kill all of these critters yet." In addition, Microsoft Security Essentials put up a perfect score with zero false positives—it didn't flag a single clean file as being malicious. AV-Test also took an initial look at Microsoft Security Essentials' rootkit detection, testing it against a few rootkit samples, and found "nothing to complain about."
Click to expand...

Another tester stated that on his 512MB laptop ...
So far I haven't witnessed a big drag on system performance, a problem I've encountered over the years with bloated security suites from Norton and McAfee. (My Toshiba note has 512MB of memory; Security Essential's minimum RAM requirement for XP is 256MB.)

During a Security Essentials system scan, Microsoft Word 2007 took 14 seconds to load, 3 seconds longer than normal.
Click to expand...
Not bad for a 512MB system.

It has in-place scanning so you can right click a file to scan it.

Considering this is based on Forefront engine, Microsofts Enterprise grade Virus protection, you can't beat it at the price.
 
Last edited:
dx2 said:
FWIW - Stateful packet inspection *should* be abel to recognize any traffic that would be virus related and block/prevent it from entering or leaving the network. ....
Click to expand...


"Should" being the key word, things don't always work as they should though. How do you know if any files you download are infected with malware or not if you never scan them? I know even AV is not 100% guarantee but I scan all files I download with Avast and Malwarebytes so the chance is slim of them being infected with anything. If it's a source I don't now very well at all I will even scan the file with Spybot on top of Avast and Malwarebytes. It's your PC though so you do as you like.
 
wow. I run NOD32 and run nightly complete scans on my Vista 64 instal, have SPI enabled on my router/ firewall, have the Fire wall on my KillerNic, run spybot from time to time, always felt pretty secure. Dont click on jack. Am a decent tech. I know better.

yet

After reading this thread, decided to dl Malwarebytes and ran a scan.. WTF. detected and cleaned trojan.agent! Man. peeps that say they run nothing. Thats just arrogant and silly imho. Glad I read this thread!

Ok, so I googled it.. found this;

http://www.malwarebytes.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=7175

So, it was a "leftover", not necessarily an active trojan. just the same, my confidence in NOD is fading. Go Go Malwarebytes!
 
Nothing except for the firewall that is built in, a hosts file and the firewall/nat in my router. Just like every OS before. :D

I do keep everything updated though and install security workarounds before an official patch is available. If someone isn't as careful in watching his security (and/or is a huge warez/porn monkey), something else is probably needed. And weakening the OS's security probably doesn't help either (cough).
 
What? XBarbarian, your confidence in your current product is 'fading' because some other program found something which wasn't (and couldn't be) even a problem? That's a bit whacky.

Also a bit whacky is the notion put forward by a few people here that they 'don't need' anti-malware/intruder stuff because they haven't encountered malware/intruders for a while. I haven't had my house burgled either, but that doesn't mean I'm agonna be propping the door wide open with a 'Welcome' sign on it!


I should perhaps expand upon my previous comment though. My protections here, in full, are:

  • NAT Firewall protection on the modem/router
  • Windows Firewall enabled.
  • Windows Defender enabled.
  • UAC enabled.
  • Internet Explorer up to date, in use and operating in 'Protected mode'.
  • AVG Free installed and enabled for 'on access' scanning.
  • A 'commonsense' policy rigidly adhered to which is a policy of "Walk away from any website which prompts me to, for viewing or use, download and install anything which is not a common and reputable add-on or plug-in."
  • A 'commonsense policy' rigidly adhered to which is a policy of "Don't open unsolicited links and/or attachments in email messages." (This includes funny/cutesy/spammy crap friends, relatives and acquaintances think I need to see, but doesn't include content in newsletters and such to which I've subscribed etc.

That's a pretty simple approach, and from Vista onwards it's one which has kept my rigs clean. I've purposely taken my rigs touring through all sorts of seamy/sleazy areas of the internet using the above approach, and come out the other side of it still clean. It ain't hard.

But I ain't agonna go bareback. I'm agonna wear a rubber!
 
Catweazle said:
What? XBarbarian, your confidence in your current product is 'fading' because some other program found something which wasn't (and couldn't be) even a problem? That's a bit whacky.
Click to expand...
I'd second it, though.
NOD32 has failed to identify two new virus threats on my network... Malware Bytes doesn't even scan the actual file in-depth like NOD32 does and it was able to remove it.
That said- I still renewed our licenses for a year because I do think it's the best.

However- if it keeps getting heavier (Up to 48MB of RAM. The new Symatec is 8MB people...), and fails to detect things, I'll be looking at a switch.
You cannot become #1 and then just stay stagnant.
 
Started using Microsoft Security Essentials today, nothing noted so far (uninstalled Avira). Very small installer, takes up minimal space as expected, barely even noticeable in terms of resource usage (2.1MB for the Private Working Set in Windows 7).

We'll see how it goes...

Edit:

Ok, two things of note:

High CPU usage when scanning an executed program .exe - pushes to 100% and holds there for a given amount of time I've noted, and when I download something it does seem a bit excessive in terms of CPU power for just doing a passive scan. This could be alleviated to some degree if the second thing of note was actually implemented which would be...

Make all AV software executables - the actual apps themselves - run at low priority, always. I can't figure out why the developers of this type of software haven't figured that out yet. There's no harm or foul caused by using the low-priority runtime option when creating AV scanning software, and whenever I notice such activity I typically alter the priority levels manually. There is simply no reason an AV client shouldn't run at low-priority at all times (as MSE now runs on my box).
 
Last edited:
DeaconFrost said:
If you are running a Windows computer that's connected to a network or the internet, it's necessary, whether it seems like it or not. This point isn't even debatable anymore, and I'm sincerely hoping we don't have to go down this route once again.
Click to expand...

And why is it necessary? If I'm not getting viruses, why should I waste my money and system resources on Anti-Virus software?
 
Make all AV software executables - the actual apps themselves - run at low priority, always. I can't figure out why the developers of this type of software haven't figured that out yet. There's no harm or foul caused by using the low-priority runtime option when creating AV scanning software, and whenever I notice such activity I typically alter the priority levels manually. There is simply no reason an AV client shouldn't run at low-priority at all times (as MSE now runs on my box).
Click to expand...
Other than wasting my time manually setting the priorities, what's the real reason to? If you initiate a virus scan, shouldn't you just...let it run without tampering with its operation?
 
Last edited:
rflcptr said:
Other than wasting my time manually setting the priorities, what's the real reason to? If you initiate a virus scan, shouldn't you just...let it run without tampering with its operation?
Click to expand...

He was talking about the passive stuff, I think... IE, the stuff that kicks off automatically.


AbJ32 said:
And why is it necessary? If I'm not getting viruses, why should I waste my money and system resources on Anti-Virus software?
Click to expand...
Simple, for the same fact of this analogy:
I've never been in a car accident, so why should I go through the bother of wearing a seatbelt?
 
TechieSooner said:
He was talking about the passive stuff, I think... IE, the stuff that kicks off automatically.
Click to expand...
Even with automatic scans, why bother lowering the priority? If you've set a scan schedule that somehow gets in the way of your work, reschedule it for time you know you're away. That's both more convenient and better for your productivity. Lowering the priorities is only going to reduce the average CPU use per second when you're doing many other things (with higher priority).

Also, what is a:
passive scan
Click to expand...
?
 
Last edited:
XBarbarian said:
So, it was a "leftover", not necessarily an active trojan. just the same, my confidence in NOD is fading. Go Go Malwarebytes!
Click to expand...

Yes, that's all Malwarebytes ha ever found on my PC too, one remnant of attempted infections in system32 folder that never got all the way through. Sometimes Malwarebytes detects false positive so always double check before you let it quarantine anything. Just the other day I did a full scan with it and it was detecting crusader.exe as some crusader trojan. It's not and is just a game executable to a Paradox game. That exe hgas online activation and is why it probably detected it as a trojan, and the fact it has the same name as a real trojan out there.
 
Last edited:
AbJ32 said:
And why is it necessary? If I'm not getting viruses, why should I waste my money and system resources on Anti-Virus software?
Click to expand...

Because you can get free ones and you can run them non resident so they cost nothing and use zero resources. At least scanning downloaded files and running a system scan on occasion is worth your time and effort, no?
 
TechieSooner said:
Simple, for the same fact of this analogy:
I've never been in a car accident, so why should I go through the bother of wearing a seatbelt?
Click to expand...

I think a more appropriate analogy is "I've never accidentally eaten poison before, so why should I go through the bother of carrying around poison control's phone number?"

Auto accidents cannot be avoided, as they depend on caution and responsibility on the part of other parties. You can do everything right and still get hit by someone doing something wrong.

Your computer, on the other hand, is entirely your responsibility. Lack of responsibility on the part of other people is not going to give you a virus. If you go around doing things like disabling UAC and running everything as an Administrator, and download things from anywhere without second thought, maybe you're better off with a good, solid AV program.

If you're more cautious with your computer habits, viruses probably aren't going to be an issue for you, so why would Anti-Virus software be such a must-have? I can understand if you want the added protection. However, I don't feel it's essential for what I do, so why should I use it?

guppy said:
Because you can get free ones and you can run them non resident so they cost nothing and use zero resources. At least scanning downloaded files and running a system scan on occasion is worth your time and effort, no?
Click to expand...

I scan my machine for viruses with a scanner every once in a blue-moon to make sure I haven't gotten a virus, and I generally do not download files from 'un-official' places. If I were going to download something iffy, I would probably scan it before opening it. However I rarely download things which have the potential to be viruses. Most of my downloads are VST plugins and sheet music, not executables and archives.
 
Last edited:
SPI on router w/NAT, Windows Firewall on, UAC default (for Windows 7), AVG Free enabled, Windows Defender enabled, Automatic Updates enabled. Browse w/Firefox, any website that asks me to install something that I wasn't expecting I walk away from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top