Choose 4 security product!

[morteza]

If you could choose 4 security product,What are your choices?

With consideration about tests results and your reviews. :)

I mean 4 security product not security tool.I don't mean 4 security product install together.I mean " what are the best AVs with consideration of AV tests and your reviews " ? only choose 4 AVs. :)

[morteza]

If i want to choose 4 AVs in:

1- ( Performance - Protection - Usability - Support ) consideration respectively: Norton , Gdata 2013 , Kaspersky , Bitdefender

2- ( Protection - Performance - Usability - Support ) consideration respectively: Gdata 2013 , Bitdefender , Norton , Kaspersky

3- ( Protection - Performance - Support - Usability ) consideration respectively: Norton , Bitdefender , Gdata 2013 , Kaspersky

4- ( Performance - Protection - Support - Usability ) consideration respectively: Norton , Gdata 2013 , Bitdefender , Kaspersky

In overall cases:

Gdata 2013 , Norton , Bitdefender , Kaspersky

Note: I live in real world !!! :) I hope you know what i mean...

[Gabben]

1.Norton

2.Kaspersky

3.ESET

4.Gdata

[House_maniac]

1/comodo internet security

2/eset smart security

3/karpersky

4/avast

[DrKash]

My choise is/

BitDefender Internet security.

[jimbojet2011]

Comodo firewall ( waiting for version 6 ) and Avast definitly

[speedy57]

• N.I.S.
• Malwarebyte Anti-Malware
• M.S.E.
• AdwCleaner

[Pedrito]

Comodo Internet Security... That's it. :P

[morteza]

I said 4 security product then you choose 1?!! :huh:

[SkyrimGuy]

Sandboxie, Comodo Firewall, appguard and MBAM.

Sandboxie out of the box has great protection. With a little configuration it's extremly secure. Comodo firewall is a light firewall with rock solid protection. With a few changes to D+ and the sandbox, it makes it very secure. Appguard is one of those programs that a few folks know about. Its a policy restriction/HIPS software. Once it's configured properly and in lockdown mode, Its as close to bullet proof as your going to get.

Malwarebytes is one of if not the best AM out there. It keeps improving and lowering its system resources. The web blocker is also a great feature and does a good job at blocking a lot of malicious links.

As you can see I don't take much stock in detection or AV's. Prevention should be number one and then detection if it's even needed.

[avmad]

If i want to choose 4 AVs in:

1- ( Performance - Protection - Usability - Support ) consideration respectively: Norton , Gdata 2013 , Kaspersky , Bitdefender

2- ( Protection - Performance - Usability - Support ) consideration respectively: Gdata 2013 , Bitdefender , Norton , Kaspersky

3- ( Protection - Performance - Support - Usability ) consideration respectively: Norton , Bitdefender , Gdata 2013 , Kaspersky

4- ( Performance - Protection - Support - Usability ) consideration respectively: Norton , Gdata 2013 , Bitdefender , Kaspersky

In overall cases:

Gdata 2013 , Norton , Bitdefender , Kaspersky

Note: I live in real world !!! :) I hope you know what i mean...

I don't really know what you mean morteza lol.

Do you mean favourite AV's? or any security tool? You can't use your 4 together so i'm confused.

Anyway I'll try lol. 4 favourite AV/suites. Useability is key for me. If I can't use it how I want it's useless to me.

Comodo

Kaspersky

Avast

Emsisoft AM or prefer IS Pack.

If it's my 4 fav security products then

Sandboxie

Shadow Defender

Malwarebytes (scan only)

Ad Muncher.

I could use just about any AV with those 4 it wouldn't make much difference (As long as it's useable for me)

Would add Online Armor or Comodo FW and I'd be happy.

[MAXS]

For PERFORMANCE no one antivirus/internet security could match with ESET, so I have chosen him

In PROTECTION field, i give voice to Kaspersky

USABILITY i don't have the winner...almost every AV could be chosen in this category...

SUPPORT, i choose Kaspersky, whenever I submitted the malware or FP, they responded as short as possible, with correct and pleasent answer...

[KoolKiller]

1. Quick Heal

2. Norton

3. G Data

4. Eset

[budda]

1) Kaspersky - light on resourses and good detection rate

) Norton - good detection rate and fast

3)Gdata - slightly more usage of resources but it have antivirus ;)

4)avast - light and good

[clubhouse]

Properly configured sandboxie, malwarebytes, hitmanpro, FireFox with a few addons and common sense.

[Dodel]

My first initial response was that the only real security option is, leaving your pc / phone / any other internet enabled gadget in it's original box, the obvious issue here being that it's kind of difficult to see the screen :P

Outpost firewall, Avast suite, Malwarebytes, NAT, or the same just swapping Avast for Eset.

Dodel.

[baso]

1- ESET

2-Emsisoft

3-Norton

4-Comodo

[morteza]

I mean 4 security product not security tool.I don't mean 4 security product install together.I mean " what are the best AVs with consideration of AV tests and your reviews " ? only choose 4 AVs. :)

[tipo]

bitdefender

kaspersky

norton

comodo (for a little experienced user)

that gdata you keep mentioning about is a piece of sh**. it uses two bought engines(avast and bitdefender). first let them create an engine from scrap and then talk about internet security. i don`t consider an internet security company a company that buys and uses other av engines.

sorry if i pissed someone arround but this is my opinion about those so called "IS companies"!

[darko999]

1º- ESET Smart Security

2º- GData Total Protection 2013

3º- N.I.S

4º- Kaspersky

[darko999]

bitdefender

kaspersky

norton

comodo (for a little experienced user)

that gdata you keep mentioning about is a piece of sh**. it uses two bought engines(avast and bitdefender). first let them create an engine from scrap and then talk about internet security. i don`t consider an internet security company a company that buys and uses other av engines.

sorry if i pissed someone arround but this is my opinion about those so called "IS companies"!

Yeah, but it isn't as easy as buying AV engines and selling em... it needs time and improvements to make it better or worse than its original AV engines, to call something "A piece of shit" I would suggest testing first, talking then.

I tested like 15 Avs time ago and I posted it, in this forum, GDATA did even better than Avast and Bitdefender, so its not just a clone of them, they have their own engineers and technologies, the behavior shield from GDATA is powerfully tuned, it detected and quarantined many threats that were undetected by both, avast and Bitdefender.

I used to use Avast, but I got infected a couple of times, then I tested a couple of Avs and decided to stay with Bitdefender 2011 I guess it was, but it was so heavy I had to unistall, and now in 2013 I'm stick to Gdata since It has deteced every single threat I have downloaded, plus it uses 2 engines and run lighter than BD I used to use, and its protection is over Avast. I'm a happy user, and even I don't like Avast and some other avs, I won't call em a piece of shit, because I know they have their own advantages and disadvantages, it depends on the user itself :P

PD: Kaspersky is 2gud also.

[ande]

Man, you didn't even mention which Norton or Kaspersky or GData or BitDefender.

"what are the best AVs with consideration of AV tests and your reviews "

Norton is officially not participating in AV-Comparatives and VB1000 tests that are the most reputable security tests...

Here are both sides of story:

AV-Comparatives regret to announce that Symantec Norton have decided not to enter its security product in the AV-Comparatives test series for 2012.In order to ensure that our test results give a complete and accurate picture of a product’s capabilities, AV-Comparatives has strict rules about which tests every product must take part in, and which tests are optional. This is to ensure that the aggregated results best reflect the actual protection the tested products provide to their customers.As Symantec Norton declined to participate in the File Detection Test, we will unfortunately not be able to provide our readers with any test results for Symantec Norton in 2012. Symantec Norton have the option of officially returning to the tests, but only in accordance with the standard conditions, namely that results of all compulsory tests will be published.AV-Comparatives allowed manufacturers to opt out of the Proactive Protection Test, and have also made participation in the Phishing Test optional. Whilst phishing is an important security issue, it is different from protection against malware, and not all security products include anti-phishing protection.Symantec Norton have indicated that they do not wish to participate in the File Detection Test. AV-Comparatives, based on feedback from our users, regard this test as still being of fundamental importance in evaluating the overall effectiveness of anti-malware software, second only to the Whole Product “Real World” Protection Test (WPT). A product could score highly in the WPT by e.g. blocking known source URLs for malware code, but fail to protect adequately if the malware is already resident on the target computer or arrives through a different channel (e.g., a USB drive). Consequently, AV-Comparatives require all participating manufacturers to take the File Detection Test. If we did not, the results of the other tests might give a misleading picture as to the overall protection offered by a product.

Symantec has long been an advocate of independent “whole product” or “real-world” tests that most closely represent the interests of consumers and utilize all of the proactive technologies provided with a product, as opposed to “static” tests that only test an individual component.  Currently AV-Comparatives does not offer a subscription focused solely on these “whole product” or “real-world” types of tests.  At this time, Symantec has chosen not to subscribe to AV-Comparatives’ testing program for 2012.  Our philosophy is to participate in tests that have high relevance and meaning for consumers, and most accurately align with their real-world need for comprehensive protection and machine cleanup from evolving online threats.  We will continue to seek out and participate in a range of tests that meet these standards to measure our products’ efficacy and performance.Tony WeissNorton Forums Global Community ManagerSymantec Corporation

Norton didn't do good on MRG Effitas Flash and Zeus Logger tests.

Also, didn't do well on NSS Labs tests - wasn't able to "protect" already known and patched MS vulnerabilities.

I can see you avatar on Norton forum so I can expect from you that you already know big issue with

Norton Tamper / Auto protect - they are unable to protect properly Norton services - they can be stopped.

Norton Intrusion Prevention component is very unusable,

they store "malicious" websites inside 1000 different signatures that are separated by type of malware site or vulnerability.

One signature doesn't contain 1 website but more of them.

so like after signature is updated and lets say files.nsanedown.com is blacklisted,

you don't have option to whitelist domain, so you must disable signature,

and by that you disable detection of other malicious websites in this signature,

or you need do disable Intrusion Prevention,

in both cases you are forced to reduce protection only to whitelist one domain.

As I can read from forum this version has become more unstable and use much more memory than in 2009. or 2010.

Also Norton, just like Emsisoft, Malwarebites and ESET, use more memory on Windows 8 than Windows 7.

Good thing with Norton products is their Live Updates, SONAR and still tolerable performances,

and many people don't know but Norton can be configured verry good and detail, but you need to know what are you doing.

Norton is good security solution, but when we sum all test then we can't see that.

If you said favorite, like avmad said, then it would be correct.

GData - what to say about company that isn't able to create their own AV engine.

As for Kaspersky and BitDefender they are only two that are good on all reviews.

Here are my favorite four :

-KBSS

-SEP

-ESET EA

-AVAST IS

[lulz]

1. Eset

2. Emsisoft

3. kaspersky

4. Avast

[morteza]

One signature doesn't contain 1 website but more of them.

so like after signature is updated and lets say files.nsanedown.com is blacklisted,

you don't have option to whitelist domain, so you must disable signature,

and by that you disable detection of other malicious websites in this signature,

or you need do disable Intrusion Prevention,

in both cases you are forced to reduce protection only to whitelist one domain.

That's completely false bro.Please read its help carefully first :)

Good thing with Norton products is their Live Updates, SONAR and still tolerable performances,

and many people don't know but Norton can be configured verry good and detail, but you need to know what are you doing.

I agree with u.

Norton is good security solution, but when we sum all test then we can't see that.

If you say about AV-C , Norton said about its tests and its problems from 2 years ago but they did not solve that and Norton had to leave this test.

If you said about other tests like:

VB100 : it's made for ESET :lol:

...

GData - what to say about company that isn't able to create their own AV engine.

It's not good reason.It's more than simple engine :) .

As for Kaspersky and BitDefender they are only two that are good on all reviews.

That's true but they are heavy in resources :) .

[1616]

1-norton 360 v6

2-kespersky

3-eset