What security setup do you have?

I am replacing nod32 with avast now.

Some guys do 0day tests on youtube and lately eset is getting poorer and poorer detection rates, and of course the money side of things, if nod32 was free I probably would still be using it but I no longer consider it a lot better than free choices.

Avast slows down browsing more but its not crippling slow, so I can live with it. It has sandboxing which is great makes up for some OS defficiences. Better analysis of what activity its doing, better email scanning and overall I actually think it has more features than nod32. Although I will post back later if I think these are bloat rather than all useful. I have disabled the web analyser addon for it. For me as I said in earlier posts if windows (or whatever OS you using) is configured right then an AV wont be needed but I have gone to the lazy setup on this system the typical limited admin account with UAC enableds so Have an AV running alongside some anti spyware protection and the occasional manual scanning from malware bytes. Firefox has noscript as well as an adblocker, also an adblocker on IE and tightening of default config to restrict scripts.

Some guys do 0day tests on youtube and lately eset is getting poorer and poorer detection rates,

Don't put your trust in youtube test. There are no methodology, no mention if the OS up to date etc and what they do is randomly ( and might be selectively) select 10 to 12 url fro MDL and test the AV. IMO sample size is too small to test a security software effectiveness. Give more importance to the test done by reputed AV testing agencies like AV comparitive, VB 100 etc.

Opinions on MSE? I have used AVG for years but did not care for there latest release. So I am going to see how MSE holds up.

gautam7 said:

Some guys do 0day tests on youtube and lately eset is getting poorer and poorer detection rates,

Don't put your trust in youtube test. There are no methodology, no mention if the OS up to date etc and what they do is randomly ( and might be selectively) select 10 to 12 url fro MDL and test the AV. IMO sample size is too small to test a security software effectiveness. Give more importance to the test done by reputed AV testing agencies like AV comparitive, VB 100 etc.

the problem with them is they dont test 0day, not to mention the growing number of issues from customers on eset about undetected stuff and even when detected unable to clean it.

cluberti said:

MSE is very good if you install it on a clean system - it's not so good if you put it on an already infected one, however. It generally goes onto systems I've built right away, or systems I've run the standalone system sweeper against offline first. After that, it's really fire and forget.

I just did I clean install on my Sony Vaio so I installed it, I think the only thing I do not like is the scan time for a full system scan seems a little slow in comparison to AVG, but I generally like it and no more AVG advertisement for there paid version.

gautam7 said:

@ chrysalis,

Even though AV comparetive does not explicitly say they test zero day malware but due to large sample size ( AV comparative real world dynamic test march june 2011 tested 2480 test cases) it is possible that it may contain zero day malware. My point is youtube tests are biased. If you don't like a AV product you can then post a youtube video by only selecting those url from MDL which are not detected by that AV or vice versa. Sample size is too small. Its better to test a AV your self (of course in virtual environment and taking proper safety measure) rather than believing in youtube video. At least then the test won't be biased for a specific brand. Lastly i should say that personal experience matter most. If you are having problem with eset (or any AV) then you should give other AV a try no matter how high they score in AV comparetive or personal test done on youtube. But its nor right to change AV just for a youtube video demonstrating it fail to block 4 or 5 url from a sample of 10.

The tester I use isnt biased. I think you making a statement out of thin air. He uses the same urls for each AV he tests not diff ones for different AV, else that would be stupid.

In terms of nod32, problems I did have it would sometimes take a stupid long time to scan files, eg. nvidia driver download on a core i5 taking 30 seconds to scan.

DMGrier said:

cluberti said:

MSE is very good if you install it on a clean system - it's not so good if you put it on an already infected one, however. It generally goes onto systems I've built right away, or systems I've run the standalone system sweeper against offline first. After that, it's really fire and forget.

I just did I clean install on my Sony Vaio so I installed it, I think the only thing I do not like is the scan time for a full system scan seems a little slow in comparison to AVG, but I generally like it and no more AVG advertisement for there paid version.

The first scan of MSE is always the slowest. It will dramatically speed up after the initial scan.