Which AntiVirus Do You Use & Why

[Tweety.Abd]

well sorry to bother you again what the avast people told do not use the file or uninstall the avast itself. :fool: :troll:

No you don't bother me. The asked me what kind of file it is and request me to send them a copy of it - I didn't reply. :)

[Diji1]

According to AV-Tests testing there are only three AV worth using IMO - in order of overall ranking (which took in multiple factors such as false positives, resource usage and others, not just detection rates):

1. Kaspersky AntiVirus

2. Microsoft Security Essentials

3. ESET NOD32

Kaspersky Internet Security (the AV and firewall bundle) is the only one with a firewall worth using - ESET Security Suite (incorporating NOD32 and a firewall) is not since the firewall is very bad.

I personally use MSSE and Windows Firewall + Binisoft Windows Firewall Controller (this gives a much more user friendly interface to Windows Firewall policies much more like other firewalls such as Comodo).

What you have to realise is that these days malware is like a production line, exploits are getting more and more sophisticated as is malware. It's not uncommon for malware to infect machines and remain completely undetected by any AV simply because it continually updates itself and/or uses polymorphism to change continuously and hence never has a hash that your AV has listed as malware. This means that no AV application will detect it.

The only way to be sure of not getting infected through the vector of files *you* execute is to only execute files that you can reasonably expect to be safe. For example: some random executable from a cyberlocker or a public tracker is *not* safe - you know nothing about the uploader. The first thing malware spreaders do after bundling a new malware executable is to test it against most commonly used AV applications to ensure that it is FUD (fully undectectable) by heuristics. This means the only way for it to be detected is its hash - but the hash will not be added to any AV programs definitions until a security researcher comes across the file and verifies that it is malware.

OTOH a file from a developers site is likely to be malware free.

Scene trackers with auto uploaders direct from scene topsites (SCC, GFT, FTN, FF etc etc) are also likely to be malware free - again because you know where it comes from. A human uploading can be anyone. Even if they are not malicious you dont know where they obtained the file from.

So don't assume a file is clean because Virustotal comes back as 0/43 - its no guarentee (as their disclaimer clearly states). The only way to be sure is where it came from.

[RadioActive]

No you don't bother me. The asked me what kind of file it is and request me to send them a copy of it - I didn't reply. :)

LOL! I can imagine how awkward it would have been if you actually sent them the file :D

[avmad]

The latest king of the tests is Emsisoft Internet Security Pack. :)

I don't know how you have problems with Avast. Just set everything to ASK, Quarantine, Do nothing.

I do this with every AV. It has to ask me first. Some won't do that like Norton, Bitdefender and that makes them unusable for me no matter how good you think they are. Kaspersky is difficult to get right as well but probably can be configured.

If you look at new test results this year I bet Emsisoft/OA will be number 1. :P

ps Diji I tested MSE myself and it was awful.

[Hacknhotq]

Bkav Pro 2011, very good antivirus!

[stringy]

Comodo user myself and this is from Matousec, probably the most respected independant tester,

The only product that confirmed its quality on 64-bit platform so far is Comodo Internet Security Premium 5.9. In Proactive Security Challenge it reached the perfect 100% score, its result in Proactive Security Challenge 64 is just 6 % lower, which is reasonable and still an excellent result. Other products, however, lose tens of percents in the score. They fail even the techniques that they passed in the 32-bit testing and that can be protected with the very same code on both 32-bit and 64-bit platforms. This is quite disturbing.

Comodo just keeps getting better and better and dont i understand why people just dismiss it or dont try it?

Sometimes you have to accept a free product is far better than a paid for software, even if you got it free,but not as satisfying to use eh?

@avmad If you look at new test results this year I bet Emsisoft/OA will be number 1. :P

I agree Emsisoft does look promising

[dcs18]

I'm a COMODO User, myself and many members here also use the same. However, it's strong points are the HIPS and the firewall, not the anti-virus module.

[dcs18]

Norton is the king of Antiviruses since ever .!

Well, yeah and I love to install the king on each & every system belonging to my enemies!!! :wub:

[Tweety.Abd]

LOL! I can imagine how awkward it would have been if you actually sent them the file :D

LOL! You're right, it'd be like I am complaining why is Avast detecting a virus? :P

[stringy]

I'm a COMODO User, myself and many members here also use the same. However, it's strong points are the HIPS and the firewall, not the anti-virus module.

Totally agree on that point but hopefully that will be remedied on upcoming CIS 6

[Tweety.Abd]

The latest king of the tests is Emsisoft Internet Security Pack. :)

I don't know how you have problems with Avast. Just set everything to ASK, Quarantine, Do nothing.

I do this with every AV. It has to ask me first. Some won't do that like Norton, Bitdefender and that makes them unusable for me no matter how good you think they are. Kaspersky is difficult to get right as well but probably can be configured.

If you look at new test results this year I bet Emsisoft/OA will be number 1. :P

ps Diji I tested MSE myself and it was awful.

I dislike that an AV should ask me for every decision. If it's a malware, the AV remove it without any intervention of my part, but should notify me about what its done. Should it be a false positive, I will instruct my AV using exclusion rules or disable prior to the execution of the file. I prefer Kaspersky because it can also be configured to be totally automatic like Norton, but also provides you the liberty to configure it's automatism. My issue with Avast was that it would not allow me to run a specific file, even though I've excluded it, disabled all the shields, etc. it still labeled the file as spyware and move it to quarantine.

[Diji1]

The latest king of the tests is Emsisoft Internet Security Pack. :)

I don't know how you have problems with Avast. Just set everything to ASK, Quarantine, Do nothing.

I do this with every AV. It has to ask me first. Some won't do that like Norton, Bitdefender and that makes them unusable for me no matter how good you think they are. Kaspersky is difficult to get right as well but probably can be configured.

If you look at new test results this year I bet Emsisoft/OA will be number 1. :P

ps Diji I tested MSE myself and it was awful.

Where are these tests please?

What don't you like about MSSE? It is a free AV (well, free if you've got an activated Windows installation *wink wink*), it has extremely high rates of detection, almost no false positives (it clearly tells you if it detects a cracks or keygens) and uses very little in the way of resources. Presumably you have a valid reason other than you don't like the interface or something.

I'm a COMODO User, myself and many members here also use the same. However, it's strong points are the HIPS and the firewall, not the anti-virus module.

Spot on. Comodo is an excellent firewall however the AV is particuarly bad especially with regards to heuristic detection: it's extremely aggressive and causes an enormous amount of false positives. I also find it's pre-emptive function Defense+ to be way to intrusive, not much point in having it if you constantly turn it off after the nth popup etc.

It also has arbitary sandboxing function as well. I have no idea how effective this sandbox is though - but it's an added layer which isn't too annoying.

People seem to want to use "security suites" for some reason which I've never understood since there is no advantage security wise to having products within the same interface. Many times a company that is excellent in one area, say AV, is poor in another area, say firewalling. This isn't always the case but seems to be much more often than not. The only security suite I'd use is KIS. But again, there's no advantage - if you want a bulletproof firewall use Comodo along with your preferred AV.

[fumia]

Norton is the king of Antiviruses since ever .!

Those who don't use Norton & go with crappy ESET can't afford Norton which provides the best protection in the industry . :showoff:

People Install crapware like ESET & avast coz then you wud have problems with these shits & you'll have a chance to tinker with your system :lol:

nope the king of AV it self is your brain :)

[Tweety.Abd]

nope the king of AV it self is your brain :)

While that is true, but the brain can never substitute an AV software.

[avmad]

Diji I tested myself with malware links and MSE has done the worst so far. Emsi doesn't get tested by that many groups but I hope now they call it internet security pack (1 installer) it will feature in more tests. EAM and OA I think is not getting beaten B)

Heres 1 where Kaspersky was last years winner :D

http://www.comss.ru/page.php?id=808

[Tweety.Abd]

Diji I tested myself with malware links and MSE has done the worst so far. Emsi doesn't get tested by that many groups but I hope now they call it internet security pack (1 installer) it will feature in more tests. EAM and OA I think is not getting beaten B)

Heres 1 where Kaspersky was last years winner :D

http://www.comss.ru/page.php?id=808

I'm not sure what's with all these AV tests. Kaspersky turns out to be the best for AV-C and according to the above tests, Kaspersky failed miserably.

[fumia]

nope the king of AV it self is your brain :)

While that is true, but the brain can never substitute an AV software.

yep but i really hate AV software that too smart and didnt ask any of my opinions :P

[Tweety.Abd]

yep but i really hate AV software that too smart and didnt ask any of my opinions :P

Those AVs are meant for people who prefer automated solutions, and it suits most of the home users.

[fumia]

yep but i really hate AV software that too smart and didnt ask any of my opinions :P

Those AVs are meant for people who prefer automated solutions, and it suits most of the home users.

i installed NIS in my younger brother PC thou :lol: 100% agree with "it suits most of the home users" :D

[Diji1]

Diji I tested myself with malware links and MSE has done the worst so far. Emsi doesn't get tested by that many groups but I hope now they call it internet security pack (1 installer) it will feature in more tests. EAM and OA I think is not getting beaten B)

Heres 1 where Kaspersky was last years winner :D

http://www.comss.ru/page.php?id=808

One I cannot read Russian so I have no idea what their methodologies are or what is being tested, two it has Comodo AV listed second and three I have never heard of this site - doesn't mean it's not reputable but I have no way of knowing it's credibility. The internet if full of biased and/or clueless people since the barriers to publishing are so low (a blessing and a curse).

Testing on a small sample of malware links is pointless. No AV provides 100% protection and definite detections are only as good as the current definitions. Try testing against 600,000+ existing malware samples that are "up to date" so to speak (a good collection of the lastest threats in the wild are within the sample) without heuristic detection enabled. This tests how up to date the current definitions of the AV are and hence their security researchers effectiveness at identifying threats. Then enable heuristics, downgrade the AV definitions to a previous date and test against the same sample to assess heuristic detection.

Also the name of the Emsisoft software is utterly irrelevant as to whether it is tested or not. It's simply a lesser known AV application atm so it's less likely to be tested if a more widely used AV can take it's place. If you want to use it go ahead, I'm not that interested in having an argument ;) I just base my decisions off AV-Tests because this is used by large sections of the IT sector so they have a certain credibility in my judgement. No one has to listen to me or them regarding which AV they choose.

[Tweety.Abd]

i installed NIS in my younger brother PC thou :lol: 100% agree with "it suits most of the home users" :D

That's the reason I have Norton installed on all my home computers. :D

[kmr1684]

Norton is the king of Antiviruses since ever .!

Well, yeah and I love to install the king on each & every system belonging to my enemies!!! :wub:

this is worst punishment ever :troll:

[GUS]

AVG because it is easy to use a key made by a keygen.

[HATE9X]

Norton is the king of Antiviruses since ever .!

Well, yeah and I love to install the king on each & every system belonging to my enemies!!! :wub:

Well played trolled Sir. :win:

[salah634u]

currently i am using avira premium but it does not repairs infection rather its renaming or deleting them,

i would like to know if someone has Quickheal patch so that i can repair the infections,or kindly suggest me one,

i don'r want to lose any off my file, the virus has simply get appended to them & av consider whole file as virus.

pls help!