Microsoft Security Essentials ranked second last in AV-Test's
-
What most people seem to forget is that Security Software really isn't everything. Being secure requires awareness, self-responsibility, and occassionally a little boost from Security Software.
Besides, seeing how BitDefender is Number 1 on that list.. BitDefender really isn't for the average computer user. Its security is more for Business & Enterprise machines just like Microsofts ForeFront security is designed for Servers.
If someone honestly needs the highest amount of security available, they're either paranoid... or they're doing some things that the shouldn't be.
-
-
What most people seem to forget is that Security Software really isn't everything. Being secure requires awareness, self-responsibility, and occassionally a little boost from Security Software.
Besides, seeing how BitDefender is Number 1 on that list.. BitDefender really isn't for the average computer user. Its security is more for Business & Enterprise machines just like Microsofts ForeFront security is designed for Servers.
I agree fully with your first paragraph. You have to be careful.
However, I have BitDefender and it is very easy for the average computer user to install, setup and operate. It gives you choices when setting it up for beginner to advanced level control. As an added bonus it was also the cheapest of the pay security software packages covering up to three machines for two years.
-
Question...
What do you do with a computer that has a virus on it that MSE can't find?
You re-install the OS.
What do you do with a bug that any other Security software finds?
You kill the bug.
So you find the best Security software possible!
Which is the hard part.
Those not to touch:
MSE
Avast
McAfee
Norton
Those to touch
NOD32
Kaspersky
Can't think of anymore...
-
Esetss 4
Any expert opinion for Eset Smart Security 4?
Good things?
Bad things?
-
-
I hear mostly good things about ESET. That said, a few years back when I tried to reinstall an older version on a friend's computer who had a subscription it was too buggy to run.
The opinions of the respected experts here who deal regularly with infection and it's cleanup are the ones you want. What I am reading is that they maintain a high regard for MSE and Avast with some caveats that it may not be sufficient for regularly visiting risky sites, or for those who cluelessly click on fake AV's.
The paid AV's which I hear the best reports on and which never seem to show up infected here are Kapersky, Eset Nod32, Bitdefender, and Malwarebytes which requires a subscription for more than on-demand scanner.
Others? Let's ask Jacee and Corrine who earned their MVP's fighting infection here.
Last edited by gregrocker; 15 May 2011 at 17:51.
-
Because I'm not a security expert I'm more likely to "blame the tool"
I use Norton NIS 2011 and haven't experienced any problem. So far I'd renew the subscription.
Saying don't touch Norton is a bit strong. Any solid reasons?
-
![]()
I hear mostly good things about ESET. That said, a few years back when I tried to reinstall an older version on a friend's computer who had a subscription it was too buggy to run.
The opinions of the respected experts here who deal regularly with infection and it's cleanup are the ones you want. What I am reading in this thread is that they maintain a high regard for MSE and Avast almost unanimously, with some caveats that it may not be sufficient for regularly visiting risky sites, or for those who cluelessly click on fake AV's.
The paid AV's which I hear the best reports on and which never seem to show up infected here are Kapersky, Eset Nod32, and Malwarebytes which requires a subscription for more than on-demand scanner.
Others? Let's ask Jacee and Corrine who earned their MVP's fighting infection here.
No matter what A/V a person uses, there is always the chance of infection and I would never suggest that any product would provide sufficient protection for visiting risky sites. In addition, any A/V can have a false/positive. Is there one magic antivirus solution for everyone? Absolutely not. As gregrocker indicated, he had a friend who had a problem with ESET, whereas, I've never had any issues with it.
As to the fake/rogue A/V's, many of the fake/rogue A/V infections are a result of drive-by installs from infected/poisoned advertisements, search results, etc. Having outdated, vulnerable third-party software (Java/Adobe) results in the computer being more susceptible to such infections.
BTW, if you should run across one of those pop-ups with a scareware window saying "Your computer might be infected. Click here to scan" or something similar, do NOT try to close by clicking the X, cancel, or by clicking anywhere on the pop-up window. Doing so installs it. Using Alt+F4 to forcibly close all open windows will generally keep the fake AV virus from installing.
Yes, ESET and Kaspersky have excellent reputations, as do other licensed A/V products. (Note: Malwarebytes is not an antivirus software. It is an anti-malware program with both a free version and a one-time-fee licensed version.)
The three "free for personal use" antivirus programs I recommend are avast!, Avira AntiVir, and Microsoft Security Essentials.
I have MSE on one computer and, because I participate in the beta program, I have ESET Smart Security on another.
-
-
A lot of the results are test methodology. These tests tend to skew toward the "Suites", as they have many components beyond the actual AV part. Since almost all of us who use Avast (like me) or MSE, also have other layers of security, that in whole, make up our "Suites", then the comparison is truly apples to oranges.
I understand the testing is for programs, and not a collection of programs. I believe the AV part of my security (Avast), serves me well in conjunction with my firewall with HIPS, my active antispyware, antilogger, etc. If my complete "Suite" were tested as a whole, I'm sure it would fare very well against these all in one products. So I personally take these results with a grain of salt, as they do not tell the whole picture. A Guy
-
![]()
As said many, many times before ... there is no Antivirus product that will protect you from everything.
I've tried most all of them, except McAfee, and found some to be user unfriendly. By that, I mean too confusing to set up the way you want it.
A 'layered' protection is what we recommend. Get a good Hosts file:
HostsMan - abelhadigital.com
What it does ...
The Hosts file contains the mappings of IP addresses to host names. This file is loaded into memory (cache) at startup, then Windows checks the Hosts file before it queries any DNS servers, which enables it to override addresses in the DNS. This prevents access to the listed sites by redirecting any connection attempts back to the local (your) machine. Another feature of the HOSTS file is its ability to block other applications from connecting to the Internet, providing the entry exists
Prevent A 'drive-by' ActiveX from installing:
Spyware Blaster and Spyware Guard are excellent protection 'before' the attack, not after it's already been done:
SpywareBlaster tutorial: http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/tuto...utorial49.html
SpywareGuard tutorial: http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/tuto...utorial50.html
Keep your chosen Anti-virus up todate!!
Also make sure you have an active Firewall, along with your Router.
Understanding and Using Firewalls
Use common sense ... don't download what doesn't belong to you, unless you've paid for the program. Don't visit dodgy sites, don't click on links just because you know how to 
, and don't borrow possible trouble by using someone else's flash drive. It may be infected!
-
Jacee, I long ago stopped using Spyware Guard, as the last update was 2004. How effective can it be in these days of 0 day exploits. Do you still think it is a worthwhile addition?
A Guy
Quote