Are Anti-Viruses A Total Waste Of Time?

[UsernameIssues]

Can the OP get honest opinions here (or in most any other forum) for both sides of this discussion? It would be reputation suicide for a forum member to say "Sure, it is okay to be online without an AV tool installed."

Yes, he can. I can for instance see no harm done to OP's own reputation here although he quite clearly states he don't want to use AV and sees no point in using them.

It is an opinion which he as everyone else is entitled to have.

I hope that you are correct, but I fear that you are not.

 

[cottonball]

BomberAF,

Since we are all entitled to our opinions, IMO, a computer without an AntiVirus is like throwing a magnet into a bucket of nails. Is this comparison graphicaly undertandable?

 

[UsernameIssues]

When my friends have an infected computer and they tell me that they did not manually ok the installation of any file, I would like to believe them. Toward that end, I've spent hours attempting to get a virtual machine infected by visiting websites known to be infected. I must not be able to construct a good magnet. I've never gotten the VM infected (at least not that MSE, WDO and ESET could detect after a session of trying to get infected).

Feel free to PM me about how to build a better magnet.

 

[Kari]

As ridiculous as it sounds, my threat level increased clearly after my two nieces (13 & 14) got from their mother a permission to join Facebook around last Christmas. One of the conditions in joining FB was that they do not only befriend their mother, my sister but also me as the "family IT geek". My sister asked then if I would try to keep an eye on them, every now and then check if I can detect something not so kosher.

I try to check for instance every link they share on FB, or links shared bu their friends appearing in their walls. Trying to be a good uncle I do not criticize them about their interests, not even when they like some odd Justin Bieber stuff . The girls are learning, the number of incidents is decreasing; in the beginning they both had some known FB exploits and bad links, nowadays only on rare occasions.

About a month ago one of the FB friends of the girls had shared once again one of these "Like this and you get 1,000 new friends" links which when clicked did seemingly nothing else than opened an FB page but at the same moment my AV warned me about a threat.

​

Checking the pop-up blocker revealed that the link had tried to open an adult XXX site in a new window.

For me this kind of thing, even if it had happened only once in my whole computing history, is a clear sign never to surf without protection. Doing it without protection would be foolish, as far as I can see.

Kari

 

[Gary]

Facebook itself is evil, It makes more and more kids rely on the Net for friends instead of making real live friends like we used to do before the Net. One never knows who is really on the other end of your FB chat? It is a tool used by pedophiles and has also caused many people to lose their jobs. If you are looking for a job just remember- whatever you put on the Net stays on the Net just like that Vegas saying.

 

[UsernameIssues]

As ridiculous as it sounds, my threat level increased clearly after my two nieces (13 & 14) got from their mother a permission to join Facebook around last Christmas. One of the conditions in joining FB was that they do not only befriend their mother, my sister but also me as the "family IT geek". .........

Wait until they learn that they can exclude certain friends from seeing certain posts :-(

Like you discovered, the iFrame code would have taken people to a website that they probably did not wish to visit... but not an infection per se. It is listed as severe because the websites that the iFrame loads will often try other exploits. But you still would have to agree to the installation of the malware.

A question that I cannot find the answer to:
Are there true drive-by infections* that can be detected/prevented by AV tools?

*No user interactions - just visit the website either directly or via an iFrame.

It is probably best for most users to put up with using an AV tool and hold on to the slim hope that it can prevent a true drive-by infection via heuristics.

 

[Rawad]

I have always been an advocate of not only using anti viruses but paid for anti viruses. For many years i have spent my hard earned cash paying for an AV so I don't get any nasty software on my computer that will cause my machine to not work correctly or steal my money.

As of today I have decided to remove my paid for Kaspersky before the subscription is up and not even replace it with a free one such as MS security Essentials. The reason I have decided to take this action, is because the only piece of software that has caused me any real problems with my computer performance, or cost me money is my AV.

I have had periods before where I have used a free AV such as MS Essentials, and I have found no difference what so ever in the rate at which I get or don't get infected. I have also noticed that the only software that ever has any affect on performance is the AV. I have therefore come to realize that the AV itself is the virus that is either costing me money, slowing my machine down or doing both.

What are your opinions on the matter, do you share my opinion that ALL AV's are a waste of time, resources and money?

I used all the Anti-virus I can think of, after awhile I decided to get rid of all of them. The reason is because it slows down your computer speed . The only one I recommend would be malwarebytes. Such an amazing protector . Now I know many others have different opinions when it comes to virus protectors but I would suggest for most people to get malwarebytes. I have had this laptop for 2 years now , and still functioning as when I first got it.

 

[UsernameIssues]

~~~
I used all the Anti-virus I can think of, after awhile I decided to get rid of all of them. The reason is because it slows down your computer speed . The only one I recommend would be malwarebytes. Such an amazing protector . Now I know many others have different opinions when it comes to virus protectors but I would suggest for most people to get malwarebytes. I have had this laptop for 2 years now , and still functioning as when I first got it.

Are you talking about the paid version of Malwarebytes Anti-Malware?

Windows 8 has MS's anti-virus product built-in. Have you disabled it?

 

[Gary]

I have always been an advocate of not only using anti viruses but paid for anti viruses. For many years i have spent my hard earned cash paying for an AV so I don't get any nasty software on my computer that will cause my machine to not work correctly or steal my money.

As of today I have decided to remove my paid for Kaspersky before the subscription is up and not even replace it with a free one such as MS security Essentials. The reason I have decided to take this action, is because the only piece of software that has caused me any real problems with my computer performance, or cost me money is my AV.

I have had periods before where I have used a free AV such as MS Essentials, and I have found no difference what so ever in the rate at which I get or don't get infected. I have also noticed that the only software that ever has any affect on performance is the AV. I have therefore come to realize that the AV itself is the virus that is either costing me money, slowing my machine down or doing both.

What are your opinions on the matter, do you share my opinion that ALL AV's are a waste of time, resources and money?

I used all the Anti-virus I can think of, after awhile I decided to get rid of all of them. The reason is because it slows down your computer speed . The only one I recommend would be malwarebytes. Such an amazing protector . Now I know many others have different opinions when it comes to virus protectors but I would suggest for most people to get malwarebytes. I have had this laptop for 2 years now , and still functioning as when I first got it.

MBAM is not a virus protector such as Kaspersky, Avast...etc. It is basically to be used in conjunction with an AV. It on the same level as Superantispyware, Spybot S&D..etc. AV's are not a waste of time or resources.

 

[Rawad]

~~~
I used all the Anti-virus I can think of, after awhile I decided to get rid of all of them. The reason is because it slows down your computer speed . The only one I recommend would be malwarebytes. Such an amazing protector . Now I know many others have different opinions when it comes to virus protectors but I would suggest for most people to get malwarebytes. I have had this laptop for 2 years now , and still functioning as when I first got it.

Are you talking about the paid version of Malwarebytes Anti-Malware?

Windows 8 has MS's anti-virus product built-in. Have you disabled it?

Not paid but trial, still does the job though. I have not disabled the MS Anti-virus.

 

[Kari]

Could someone please provide some credible links and / or results to show how and how much for instance MSE slows down a Windows computer?

 

[Rawad]

Could someone please provide some credible links and / or results to show how and how much for instance MSE slows down a Windows computer?

I don't think it does man.

 

[Kari]

I was referring to those posts in this thread arguing that as all AV slows down your PC, the cons overweight pros. As I have not noticed any slow down I would like to see some proof.

 

[Joseph K]

I use MSE, Trend Housecalls and common sense to keep bugs and stuff off my computer. Because of my surfing patterns and email setup my system stays pretty clean. I think AV is important, but a good defense and common sense is just as important.

I have a very low tolerance for viruses, bots etc. If I get something and I can't remove it in 48-72 hours, I reformat and re-install. That's happened twice in the seven years I've owned this laptop.

 

[UsernameIssues]

Could someone please provide some credible links and / or results to show how and how much for instance MSE slows down a Windows computer?

There was this link from a few weeks ago:
Speed Up PC Performance by Replacing Microsoft's Built-In Antivirus
The chart seems to indicate a difference of 5 (arbitrary units?) between no av tool installed and MSE... or maybe I'm reading it wrong. I don't notice a slowdown, but each computer setup is different. It would be nice if the OP would detail the slow down witnessed.

 

[UsernameIssues]

I use MSE, Trend Housecalls and common sense to keep bugs and stuff off my computer. Because of my surfing patterns and email setup my system stays pretty clean. I think AV is important, but a good defense and common sense is just as important.

I have a very low tolerance for viruses, bots etc. If I get something and I can't remove it in 48-72 hours, I reformat and re-install. That's happened twice in the seven years I've owned this laptop.

Your story (as told) actually adds to one of the points that the OP was making:
If you still get infected, then why have an AV tool installed?

Of course - this assumes that there are negatives to having an av tool installed.
The OP claims a performance hit - even with MSE
(but the OP won't revisit using MSE at it lowest settings)

The OP correctly asserts that AV tools can hamper the removal of an infection.
(A minor issue - in my mind.)

False positives was an issue that I raised along with the general principle of:
If you don't use the software, uninstall it.

For those that have not read the entire thread - I'll repeat the I suggest people use MSE.

 

[Wenda]

"I used to run Avirafree version, but when I went over to the Win 8 preview (CP, I think it was) I decided to give their 'new, improved' Windows Defender a shot. So far, I've been happy with it. It runs in tandem with MalwareBytes Pro (and no, they don't clash, they work well together).

Really, the only issue I've had is that MalwareBytes Pro is sometimes too ready to block a site/program.

I run the latest version of MSE and MalwareBytes trial on the Win 7 machine, with similarly satisfactory results."


And...


"While doing one of my IT courses, we set an XP Pro (no SP) machine up without any security and connected it to the internet, as an experiment. Didn't do anything with it, just hooked it up and opened IE6. It was hit within minutes, and crippled into unusability within an hour. We re-imaged it, installed SP3 and an AV program and did the same thing. It was still clean at the end of the week. But I'm constantly amazed by the number of machines I see with either no protection, or it's so hopelessly out-of-date that it's useless, or, worst of all, it's not even turned on. And yet who's the first to cop the blame when they get a 'nasty'? Yep, Microsoft."


Quotes from a couple of my posts on the same subject on EightForums.


Wenda.