What's the Best Anti-virus?

[UsernameIssues]

Dallas 7,
Could you point me to a document written by or endorsed by AV-Comparatives that defines what they consider to be a virus?

edit: I should add that I looked (and failed to find such a document) before asking you to look. I'm not baiting for an argument, I really want to know how people/companies from all over the world can agree on what a virus is - on what it does.

 

[ThrashZone]

MSE is not high on the list because Microsoft has nothing to sell,
No pay for versions so why compete with other utilities that do,
There is no juice to be squeezed and no point in competing for revenues,
I respect everyone's choice,
But I prefer a windows and internet explorer friendly suite if there was a pay for version I would jump on it in a New York second
So ask yourself does ie of any version Crash for no reason
Not mine ever,
Cheers.

 

[UsernameIssues]

MSE is not high on the list because Microsoft has nothing to sell,
No pay for versions so why compete with other utilities that do,
There is no juice to be squeezed and no point in competing for revenues,
I respect everyone's choice,
But I prefer a windows and internet explorer friendly suite if there was a pay for version I would jump on it in a New York second
So ask yourself does ie of any version Crash for no reason
Not mine ever,
Cheers.

You know my position on MSE. I still install it because it plays nice with the OS and other apps. But I cannot defend against the argument that MSE keeps things stable because it does so little. The only thing pushing me away from MSE is stuff like Conduit. If MS would move the threshold to include those PUPs (like Panda does), then I could see sticking with MSE.


I think that you followed along while I was playing with that one infection for more than a week. You saw the videos where MSE could not find/remove a simple unlocked file. It's not like this particular infection made tons of copies. There was just the original file (which deleted itself) and the one copy (which ran).

Worse than not being able to clear the infection was MSE claiming that it had done so. Never telling the user that the issue was still there (unless the user looked at the log files). The user figured that the issue was still around once the FBI warning took over the desktop and task bar.

edit: this thread might be relevant to AV stability issues.

 

[A Guy]

MSE is at the bottom because it is designed that way. According to MS anyway

Microsoft: Security Essentials is designed to be bottom of the antivirus rankings | Security | News | PC Pro

They say they also only make it detect the things that it's users actually run into. They get that info from those that allow MS to collect the info. I was expecting people to stop doubting these AV test results when MS themselves said it was true.

A Guy

 

[ICIT2LOL]

Dallas 7,
Could you point me to a document written by or endorsed by AV-Comparatives that defines what they consider to be a virus?

edit: I should add that I looked (and failed to find such a document) before asking you to look. I'm not baiting for an argument, I really want to know how people/companies from all over the world can agree on what a virus is - on what it does.

Yes well User I think you have very valid point and one that I have said all along that any malware has to be made just in the same way that they might design a fuel injection system for a car and other see that system and copy it using the original owners design. Therefore the original design is produced for a certain amount of time before another manufacturer can get going with that system.

Now to me malware follows much the same path and until the AV programs no matter how good they are see and recognize a piece of software or whatever (because it is creeping into the manufacture of hardware parts too) as a malware then it will do whatever damage it can before a deterrent is put out by the AV programs to nullify it.

I am no expert as to how much malware is produced each day but I believe it is a huge amount but at the rate that malware is produced I really don't see any AV as being infallible because it has to be read and ID'd before pronouncing it as malware and adding it to the definitions listings.

To me it seems to be a huge task for any AV to recognize malware as it is put out and would have to assume that the process must be automated in some way because otherwise one would to have a staff of enormous numbers to go through the rubbish each day.

But like I also said we could debate this subject till the cows come home and you will never get any absolute agreement on which is best. The best AV is the operator

 

[A Guy]

AVs don't have to depend 100% on definitions, there is also heuristics. Behavioral analysis. This can result in more false positives as some programs look suspicious based on the way they work. Whitelisting digitally signed programs used to be a fix, but now even malicious programs can be digitally signed

Because of these issues a layered security approach is especially important. It's certainly possible some new variant can escape detection by the whole phalanx of security programs, but one or all will soon add detections, or community/cloud detections will flow out to all users.

A Guy

 

[ICIT2LOL]

AVs don't have to depend 100% on definitions, there is also heuristics. Behavioral analysis. This can result in more false positives as some programs look suspicious based on the way they work. Whitelisting digitally signed programs used to be a fix, but now even malicious programs can be digitally signed

Because of these issues a layered security approach is especially important. It's certainly possible some new variant can escape detection by the whole phalanx of security programs, but one or all will soon add detections, or community/cloud detections will flow out to all users.

A Guy

Yep I know mate I was just quoting definitions after the pick ups were made however that is done.
Personally I am under no illusion that if someone wants to hack into any specific machine/s they can do it and there is no such thing as a perfect defence system.
But like Dallas I go by what the Comparatives show even though they do not show them all and I have used a few different ones over time and just find Kaspersky ahs the best of both worlds in being reasonably safe and also cheap to run. Having said that I still pick up stuff with the on call scans.
I said it before and again this is a subject that so may take so seriously and debate for far too long when there are better things to be discussing.

 

[UsernameIssues]

Dallas 7,
Could you point me to a document written by or endorsed by AV-Comparatives that defines what they consider to be a virus?

edit: I should add that I looked (and failed to find such a document) before asking you to look. I'm not baiting for an argument, I really want to know how people/companies from all over the world can agree on what a virus is - on what it does.

I'm not having any luck finding info on this.

Does anyone have a link that defines what a virus is/does - in the context of standardized testing?

 

[ICIT2LOL]

I don't know about testing but this gives a good idea on what it is and therefore I reckon it should give an idea of how they are tested for.
Computer virus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[UsernameIssues]

I don't know about testing but this gives a good idea on what it is and therefore I reckon it should give an idea of how they are tested for.
Computer virus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks. You picked a good document for this discussion.

A computer virus is a type of malware that, when executed, replicates by inserting copies of itself (possibly modified) into other computer programs, data files, or the boot sector of the hard drive; when this replication succeeds, the affected areas are then said to be "infected".
~~~

~~~
...the defining characteristic of viruses is that they are self-replicating computer programs which install themselves without the user's consent.

By that definition, the file shown in the videos in this post...
http://www.sevenforums.com/system-security/308472-mse-worries-6.html#post2573490
...is not a virus.
...it does not infect any other file
...the user consented to the install.
So it could not be a part of the testing.

So, how does a testing organization come up with 12,000+ files that every company agrees is a virus? I'm not doubting that it can be done, I'm just wondering how it is done. They don't seem to discuss that. Perhaps it is obvious to everyone (except me) and thus need not be explained.

 

[Britton30]

The term "virus" has come to mean any and all types of PC infections from tracking cookies to bots and Trojans. Malware is another I think, like the brand name Kleenex now means any type of boxed tissues.

 

[ICIT2LOL]

This is another good and thankfully small link that has other links within it What is Virus (Computer Virus)? Webopedia

 

[andrew129260]

How We Interpret Antivirus Lab Tests | PCMag.com

Here is an example of samples used: See page 5

http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/avc_rem_201311_en.pdf

 

[UsernameIssues]

I appreciate each member that has taken the time to comment on or dig up links to this part of the discussion.

The term "virus" has come to mean any and all types of PC infections from tracking cookies to bots and Trojans. Malware is another I think, like the brand name Kleenex now means any type of boxed tissues.

You are correct (of course and this is part of my point. How can one define the actions of a file so that everyone in the world agrees that it should be flagged as a virus? It would seem to me that the detection rate test (with its 12,000+ files) would be impacted if some vendors simply don't call some of those files viruses.

This is another good and thankfully small link that has other links within it What is Virus (Computer Virus)? Webopedia

Thanks. I too am glad that it was a short (but good) article

How We Interpret Antivirus Lab Tests | PCMag.com

Here is an example of samples used: See page 5

http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/avc_rem_201311_en.pdf

Excellent finds. However, it is relatively simple to find files for the malware removal test. That test is laborious and complex, but finding a few files is not as hard as getting 12,000+ files (that all parties agree are viruses) for the detection rate test.

Again, I'm not speaking out against the validity or value of the AV comparison tests. I'm just discussing something that I've never attempted to research - until now.

Do you see what I'm getting at?
...what I'm questioning?

 

[sle3pingz]

guys , did you guys know how to remove and clean virus hidden shortcut from pc ? using which antivirus or method ? Thanks

 

[A Guy]

I'd ask the question in the System Security - Windows 7 Help Forums section. Give as much info as possible so they will know what you are talking about, and what has been done so far. A Guy

 

[andrew129260]

@ usernameissues.

Yes I do

 

[NoN]

Here an article describing "Win XP, 7 & 8.1: Internet Security Suites Complete an Endurance Test Lasting 6 Months" from 23rd April 2014

Between September 2013 and February 2014, the laboratory experts at AV-TEST subjected 24 Internet security suites to a multitude of complex tests. This endurance test carried out on protection packages quickly shows which packages are always on the ball, even in a stressful testing situation, and which packages fail to impress.

Win XP, 7 & 8.1: Internet Security Suites Complete an Endurance Test Lasting 6 Months

Took Bitdefender antivirus plus 2014 two days ago for a year licensed...though this above is mentionned for Internet Suite including an AV solution.

Bitdefender AVP 2014 looks quite alright to me and i just did not choose at setup install, the "AutoPilot" mode for better learn & control. Pretty well rated solution, will see!

 

[A Guy]

Bitdefender (not the free version) is indeed usually highly rated, and does well on these AV comparisons. It will be interesting to see if it also plays well with your system as a whole. A Guy

 

[NoN]

Bitdefender (not the free version) is indeed usually highly rated, and does well on these AV comparisons. It will be interesting to see if it also plays well with your system as a whole. A Guy

Well, It took it quite a few quick scans & a full one to settle down in the system. I had to run a full scan (approx: 1:35 hour run) and it scanned all of my hard drives. I had been able to evaluate which folders one to exclude for the next time.

Did have two typical BSOD 0x101 (Watch Dog Timer) yesterday, which related to CPU response when launched quick scans and could be the bitdefender "bdvedisk.sys" driver.

Could also be this driver interfere with my RAID0 setup w/Intel smart response Technology, so the time it got cached in. Did run quick scan afterward and no BSOD since.

It did not Bsod on full scan one though.:huh:

On quick scan it found two .txt in "AppData" LocalLow, that it "disinfected". Looks its the word they use to warn you!!

On Full Scan nothing was found.

I beleive "Autopilot" might be handy & worry free for some but when using for the first time an AV better not let it run its own without knowning what it does!

I do not have at the moment high CPU loads...but it does takes quite an amount in the run process! It also run very smooth in the background and make itself quiet when updating its database.
A little animated widget (dark grey color) is provided showing activities.

"Real Time Protection Access" seems working fine and i can see activities (in widget) while browsing. You can parameter how it works on folder with three setting: Tolerant; Normal; Agressive..."Virus control activity" have those settings either for alerts.


Infos: From Bitdefender technical support member forum HERE, seems a Microsoft Kb Article ID: 2664888 help solving some of BSOD (mainly with SafePay app) in windows 7.


Yeah, will see how it plays!!

Widget activity: