three antivirus programs

sparkie: "You can also simply disable all outwards connections if something you notice is really wrong."

and how would you be able to notice that ?

"Then use the malware/av to remove it. The thing is, the majority of malware that send outward connections are easily recognizable."

are they ?
what ground do you have for saying that ?
it would be very interesting to hear some facts.

from what i´ve been reading here on the forum, as i don´t use a router myself i have no personal experience, routers don´t block OUTGOING connections, , they can block only INCOMING connections.

TheIgster said:

sparkie,

I like having full control of my PC. Just my way of doing things. And 40 MB into RAM is nothing. I have 8 GB of RAM.

No one is criticizing you for having less security on your system. That is your choice. But to suggest that's all anyone needs is incorrect IMO. Nothing personal.

I know lol i was jking bout the criticizing part, but I simply honestly believe that for the best "experience" of windows to install as little as possible. and i truely believe that a router, simple free av and malware, is enough for the average user. Let's not forget that we, are not examples of average users.
Why would an average user want to scan their computer every week using malwarebytes, etc? They want the computer to simply function, not as a hobby. An av that does everything automatically is what average people want

Because I believe that most of us should have better things to do rather than worry all day long about security. Most average users couldn't care less about antivirus. Most of my friends ignore any warning that the antivirus program gives them at all. They simply want something that "works". The younger generation (myself included ) would care much more about this stuff.

I have already told you my view about software firewall protection. I assert that it is redundant whenever you have a router that has a hardware firewall. This can be analogous to graphical acceleration. We all know the great benefit of hardware acceleration. Same thing with firewall. If hardware can be specialized for the task of protection, then we need not use our cpu. In addition, I believe strongly that the router based firewall is more secure than the software based one. The router is a physical filter of all network traffic. The software firewall is a software filter of all network traffic. If it is put that way, I believe that physical protection is much more effective. That may not be your opinion but that is definitely mine. I already gave my source that indicate that a router firewall would be equally, if not more, secure than a software firewall. Read this:

Some firewalls are software firewalls. They reside on the machine that is connected to the Internet, and act as a filter for information going in and out. The major drawback to a software firewall is that they have already connected to your box. It is like the difference between locking your front door, and locking your jewellery box. Both are meant to keep your jewels
safe, but one is obviously more effective.
A hardware firewall (like a machine running SmoothWall) is between your network and the Internet. It forces anyone who wants to break in to have to go through an extra machine. The more work you make them do, the less likely they are going to want to spend the time on you. After all, the person down the street isn't protected at all. They are an easier target.

"The main difference is a hardware firewall is a separate hardware unit that blocks attempts before they enter the system/network and a software firewall sits in the back of a system and reacts when an attempt has been made. A software firewall is no match for a hardware appliance's performance."

"Plus software firewalls are messy and waste resources.. get an external box doing dedicated security tasks IMO"

These are posts from people on wirelessforum.

To reiterate, the only advantage to a software firewall is protection when you don't have a router (modem directly to computer) and a public location where anyone can probably ping you in the vicinity lol.

Thus, I say this to the thread starter, that you don't really need to be more secure than you already are. If you truely want the maximum security, you can of course install whatever you want. My assertion is that if I were you, I wouldn't install any more than I have to. Avast is a good program. PC tools spyware doctor is a good program. Avira is a good program. MSE is a good program. However, putting them all together on your pc doesn't make it much better.

@igster, I hope that our argument is resolved.

Cheers~!

sparkie: "To everyone in the thread: Whatever the results of this "discussion" is, one main point MUST be made. YOU MUST NEVER EVER NEVER EVER RUN TWO REAL-TIME PROTECTION AT THE SAME TIME. This has very likely been discussed in earlier threads"

WRONG AGAIN !

some antivirus-programs works very well together, fx. a-squared (with REALTIME-protection !)
which is designed to work together with antivirus-programs like MSE, Avira, etc.

have you not read my previous post ?
i´ve been running MSE, Avira & a-squared together without problems...

other combinations also work very well, and yes, this has been discussed in some other threads, i suggest you read them before posting such nonsens.

i also suggest you read the threads on firewalls/routers, there is a lot of info there about how a router work, and what it can block.

the search-function can be very useful....

and from what i´ve read in your posts, you don´t seem to have any idea what you are talking about,
PLEASE sparkie, perhaps you should learn the basics of computer security BEFORE you start posting in such an aggressive manner ?