Anyone try NANO AntiVirus?

[lyldz]

main site:http://www.nanoav.ru/

Are there any that experience?

[STEEL]

Yep, did not like. Reason: MBAM + AVG IS 2013 + NPE & S/Defender makes much better Music :rolleyes: :)

[demoneye]

Yep, did not like. Reason: MBAM + AVG IS 2013 + NPE & S/Defender makes much better Music :rolleyes: :)

:lmao:

[vissha]

Didn't like it. Not a good choice. Tried in Win 7 & Win 8 [both Virtual OS].

Note: We can't trust all Russian s/w. Russia is more than US in tracking people. It may/might contain tracking or any other security tampering codes inside. Better use Bitdefender/Avira/Rising/Trend Micro.

[LazyPotato]

I haven't,but I'd rather use Kaspersky (if your machine can handle it :)) (or ESET,like me) + MBAM pro + HMP + Emsisoft Antimalware + Shadow Defender.

[tezza]

Note: We can't trust all Russian s/w. Russia is more than US in tracking people. It may/might contain tracking or any other security tampering codes inside. Better use Bitdefender/Avira/Rising/Trend Micro.

[Phyton]

:think:

Yep, did not like. Reason: MBAM + AVG IS 2013 + NPE & S/Defender makes much better Music :rolleyes: :)

[vissha]

Chinese products are not like Russian, Chinese are thriving to serve the world better with best or similar products which are best in their services. Not only s/w, it includes your mobile/smartphone/TV/Music player/any other electronic products too. Old China is slightly different from present, because old were just products with features but with low quality but new are with more features and good/best quality. Chinese just don't track people like US/Russia/UK.

[tezza]

Chinese products are not like Russian, Chinese are thriving to serve the world better with best or similar products which are best in their services. Not only s/w, it includes your mobile/smartphone/TV/Music player/any other electronic products too. Old China is slightly different from present, because old were just products with features but with low quality but new are with more features and good/best quality. Chinese just don't track people like US/Russia/UK.

@ vissha

We are talking AV, not smart phones etc. I do not believe Russian AV like Kaspersky AND Dr.Web contain tracking or any other security tampering codes inside. On the other hand, as per wikipedia

Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China is conducted under a wide variety of laws and administrative regulations. In accordance with these laws, more than sixty Internet regulations have been made by the government of the People's Republic of China (PRC), which have been implemented by provincial branches of state-owned ISPs, companies, and organizations.[1][2] The apparatus of the PRC's Internet repression is considered more extensive and more advanced than in any other country in the world. The governmental authorities not only block website content but also monitor the Internet access of individuals.

Simply the point i was making about yourself trusting Chinese software ahead of Russian for tracking purpose. :)

[vissha]

Chinese products are not like Russian, Chinese are thriving to serve the world better with best or similar products which are best in their services. Not only s/w, it includes your mobile/smartphone/TV/Music player/any other electronic products too. Old China is slightly different from present, because old were just products with features but with low quality but new are with more features and good/best quality. Chinese just don't track people like US/Russia/UK.

@ vissha

We are talking AV, not smart phones etc. I do not believe Russian AV like Kaspersky AND Dr.Web contain tracking or any other security tampering codes inside. On the other hand, as per wikipedia

Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China is conducted under a wide variety of laws and administrative regulations. In accordance with these laws, more than sixty Internet regulations have been made by the government of the People's Republic of China (PRC), which have been implemented by provincial branches of state-owned ISPs, companies, and organizations.[1][2] The apparatus of the PRC's Internet repression is considered more extensive and more advanced than in any other country in the world. The governmental authorities not only block website content but also monitor the Internet access of individuals.

Simply the point i was making about yourself trusting Chinese software ahead of Russian for tracking purpose. :)

I just didn't say about all s/w from Russia. If its new or lesser used, there will be more risks using it either from Russia/China/US. Kaspersky is all over world, it can't hide if it does anything suspicious. But Nano AV is not like Kaspersky or any other reputed Org. The thread starter "lyldz" is asking people to try out just like any other AV. That is what i replied to.

[unknownasphyxiated]

conclusion,don't use new unknown,untested,unproven av :lol:

use at your own risk

[SnakeMasteR]

Chinese products are not like Russian, Chinese are thriving to serve the world better with best or similar products which are best in their services. Not only s/w, it includes your mobile/smartphone/TV/Music player/any other electronic products too. Old China is slightly different from present, because old were just products with features but with low quality but new are with more features and good/best quality. Chinese just don't track people like US/Russia/UK.

New China is not known for innovation, or own high quality products, that was Old China. Most high quality products are copies, sold under a different name.

C2C or C to C is not innovative.

I'm on Facebook now, add me. :lol:

http://www.renren.com/

It's a good example but the same with everything else that has highest reputation on the westside of the globe.

[DKT27]

Chinese products are not like Russian

Just noting for the info.

Top Chinese networking, etc. companies are accused and being probed of being quite of a security problem.

Take chinese company Huawei for example:

In the US, Huawei has been challenged due to concerns of United States security officials that Huawei-made telecommunications equipment is designed to allow unauthorized access by the Chinese government and the Chinese People's Liberation Army,^{[134][135][136][137]} given that Ren Zhengfei, the founder of the company, served as an engineer in the army in the early 1980s.^[138] In the United Kingdom, the Conservative Party raised concerns about security over Huawei’s bid for Marconi in 2005,^[136] and the company's equipment was mentioned as an alleged potential threat in a 2009 government briefing by Alex Allan, chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee.^[139] In December 2010, Huawei opened a Cyber Security Evaluation Centre to test its hardware and software to ensure they can withstand growing cyber security threats.^[140][141] In the U.S., some members of Congress raised questions about the company's proposed merger with communications company 3Com in 2008,^[142] and its bid for a Sprint contract in 2010.^[138] In addition, Huawei withdrew its purchase of 3Leaf systems in 2010, following a review by the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment (CFIUS).^[135]

In a 2011 open letter, Huawei stated that the security concerns are “unfounded and unproven” and called on the U.S. government to investigate any aspect of its business.^[143][144] The US-based non-profit organization Asia Society carried out a review of Chinese companies trying to invest in the U.S., including Huawei. The organization found that only a few investment deals were blocked following unfavorable findings by the CFIUS or had been given a recommendation not to apply, however all large transactions had been politicized by groups including the U.S. media, members of Congress and the security community.^{[145][dead link]} However, another article unrelated to the report published by the Asia Society reported that, "fear that the P.R.C. government could strongarm private or unaffiliated Chinese groups into giving up cyber-secrets is reflected in the U.S. government's treatment of Chinese telecom company Huawei."^[146]

In October 2009, the Indian Department of Telecommunications reportedly requested national telecom operators to "self-regulate" the use of all equipment from European, U.S. and Chinese telecoms manufacturers following security concerns.^[147] Earlier, in 2005, Huawei was blocked from supplying equipment to India's Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) cellular phone service provider.^[148] In 2010, the Indian Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) insisted on cancelling the rest of the Huawei contract with BSNL and pressed charges against several top BSNL officers regarding their "doubtful integrity and dubious links with Chinese firms".^[149][150] In June 2010, an interim solution was introduced that would allow the import of Chinese-made telecoms equipment to India if pre-certified by international security agencies such as Canada’s Electronic Warfare Associates, US-based Infoguard, and Israel’s ALTAL Security Consulting.^[151]

In October 2011, the Wall Street Journal reported that Huawei had become Iran's leading provider of telecommunications equipment, including monitoring technologies that could be used for surveillance.^[152] Huawei responded with a statement claiming the story misrepresented the company's involvement: "We have never been involved and do not provide any services relating to monitoring or filtering technologies and equipment anywhere in the world".^[153]

In December 2011, Bloomberg reported that the U.S. is invoking Cold War-era national security powers to force telecommunication companies including AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. to divulge confidential information about their networks in a hunt for Chinese cyber-spying, with Richard Falkenrath, a senior fellow in the Council on Foreign Relations Cyberconflict and Cybersecurity Initiative, saying, “This is beyond vague suspicions...Congress is now looking at this as well, and they’re doing so based on very specific material provided them in a classified setting by the National Security Agency." The action represents a concern that China and other countries may be using their growing export sectors to develop built-in spying capabilities in U.S. networks. The U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence said it would investigate potential security threats posed by some foreign companies, and mentioned Huawei specifically. A spokesman for Huawei said that the company conducts its businesses according to normal business practices and actually welcomed the investigation.^[154]

In 2001, it was alleged that Huawei Technologies India had developed telecommunications equipment for the Taliban in Afghanistan, and newspapers reported that the Indian government had launched a probe into the firm's operations.^[155][156] Huawei responded, stating that the company did not have "any link with the Taliban", as its only customers are telecommunications carriers^[157] and its facilities "always operate according to U.N. rules and the local laws of each country".^[158] On 15 December 2001, the Indian authorities announced that they had not found any evidence that Huawei India had any connection to the Taliban,^[159] although the U.S. remains suspicious.^[160]

In March 2012, Australia media sources reported that the Australian government had excluded Huawei from tendering for contracts with NBN Co, a government-owned corporation that is managing the construction of the National Broadband Network,^[161] following advice from the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation regarding security concerns.^[162] The Attorney-General's Department stated in response to these reports that the National Broadband Network is "a strategic and significant government investment, [and] we have a responsibility to do our utmost to protect its integrity and that of the information carried on it."^[163]

In July 2012, Felix Lindner and Gregor Kopf gave a conference at Defcon to announce that they uncovered several critical vulnerabilities in Huawei routers (models AR18 and AR29)^[164] which could be used to get remote access to the device. The researchers said that Huawei "doesn't have a security contact for reporting vulnerabilities, doesn't put out security advisories and doesn't say what bugs have been fixed in its firmware updates", and as a result, the vulnerabilities have not been publicly disclosed. Huawei replied that they were investigating the claims.^[165]

On 8 October 2012, a US House Intelligence Committee panel issued a report describing Huawei as a "national security threat" due to its alleged ties to various Chinese governmental agencies. The panel's report suggested that Huawei should "be barred from doing business with the US government", and additionally alleged that the telecom manufacturer had committed "potential violations" related to immigration, bribery, corruption, and copyright infringement.^[166] However, a subsequent White House-ordered review found no concrete evidence to support the House report's espionage allegations.^[64]

On 9 October 2012, a spokesman for Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper indicated that the Canadian government invoked a national security exception to exclude Huawei from its plans to build a secure government communications network.^[167]

On 25 October 2012, a Reuters report^[64] wrote that according to documents and interviews, an Iranian-based seller of Huawei (Soda Gostar Persian Vista) last year tried to sell embargoed American antenna equipment (made by American company [Andrew LLC] to an Iranian firm [MTN Irancell]). Specifically, the Andrew antennas were part of a large order for Huawei telecommunications gear that MTN Irancell had placed through Soda Gostar, but the MTN Irancell says it canceled the deal with Huawei when it learned the items were subject to sanctions and before any equipment was delivered.^[64] Vic Guyang, a Huawei spokesman, acknowledged that MTN Irancell had canceled the order; Rick Aspan, a spokesman for CommScope, said the company was not aware of the aborted transaction.^[64]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei#Criticisms_and_controversies

This is just an example. A long list of Chinese companies are being probed for being a "major national threat" to U.S. and other countries.

The reason I'm noting this is not because I'm against or with Russian software or Chinese softwares, but these things are making news these days.

[STEEL]

Yep!!! Agree. And i forgot, use Hitman Pro too :rolleyes: :)

[ande]

Any major AV give you choice of data collecting, just select NO.

It's silly to think that on the other hand USA companies are more safe, Symantec, Sophos and McAfee are highly collaborating with DoD,

and are influenced by USA agencies, and we know for presence of "Big Brother" in USA, Germany, China and many other countries.

It is very childish to think that China do not have good products, high end, quality and innovative products,

what we know of China as copycat, is their industry goal, that's why their economy in time of crisis do not fall.

They all tend to critic China, but when it comes to opening new production plant is seems they forgot all human rights talk.

It is not very hard to track and encrypt what exactly your product is sending back , and, trust me, they know it, so using known/trusted company is a wise choice,

however using know/default config is not,

and,

instead of thinking good software is what is gonna secure you

try investing some time and energy to find good and working solutions which are going to protect you, your data and your money.

Good pentester will find work around solution for any firewall and hips in matter of weeks,

that is why so many companies invest more in people than hardware/software for securing them, their business, their people and their money.