NOD32 used to be my recommendation hands down. It's the one I've used to help friends, family, and corporations, who used Norton, Macafee, AVG, etc. until they got infected. But the new Kaspersky has gotten rid of their bloated/slow operation and they've caught a few very esoteric trojans than NOD32 missed...for the first time ever. And this is in the wild, not hypothetical tests. So, I'm rating Kaspersky #1 now and NOD32 as #2. NOD32 is currently what I own, btw.
Of free ones, I'm hearing AVAST has trumped AVG these days, but I don't know that from personal experience.
I've also heard the new Norton 2009 may have fixed the things that have causes all of us professionals to shun them for a decade now. I will take a VERY wait and see. If I hear they rock for years in a row, I'll consider testing them again, hehe.
If you have windows defender built in (XP/Vista) and either of these two commercial anti-virus packages, you won't need anything like Ad-Aware or Spybot on your systems. That would be redundant with weaker protections and would slow your system down needlessly.
I hope that helps.
I agree with this advice 100%. A cheesy online anti-spyware scanner won't ever be able to tell if your computer is part of the Zombie bot-net that is sending out spam to all of the rest of us.
That's trojan and rootkit territory and you really do want protection.
I'm in the ESET camp. Fast, thorough scanning and very frequent definition updates. I've got nearly a terabyte of storage and it completes a scan in about an hour and a half.
From an Admin standpoint it's NOD32 (ESET) with Kaspersky a close second. I would rate these two at the top of the game. For me, I want an AV product that doesn't create more problems.
Both these products have small footprints and behave themselves, not causing more issues.
Again, I use iolo products. Virus, Firewall, etc. Been using since around 2004. I've been hit once (recently) with a virus that was an operator error issue. Good product imo. Easy to use, not a system hog either. I've got the full suite. System Mechanic Professional 8.something now. Good product.
Normally I would check what Consumer's Union has done in the way of testing a product before buying it (or obtaining it if it is freeware). They did test a number of AV/security packages/suites and have published a couple of reports in their magazine "Consumer Reports". In the first report, a little over a year ago, they rated Trend Micro's PCCillan as a best buy, and more recently have published a report on the free security suites.
However, when I took their advice and switched to PCCillan, I learned the hard way that the testing CU did was incomplete, although the procedures untested were unexpected.
1). Some (and I would think all) AV/Security suites put hooks into the OS to obtain the access it needs to provide the protection it gives.
2). Use of the uninstall wizard for removing those hooks might not remove these hooks. I found out for certain that the Trend Micro products do not (I got that one directly from the horse's mouth). It also appears the same is true of Norton, although I can't be certain. If you have a pre-installed AV package, you would be advised to check with the manufacturer about how to do a complete removal. Trend Micro has extra procedures that MUST be run if you are uninstalling a Trend Micro security suite and installing someone elses.
3). If a pre-installed AV package or one you installed yourself is not removed completely (see 2 above), installing a new package will run into conflicts with the old package's hooks, and this will create a drastic performance degredation. I can well imagine it could cause other problems as well, such as the one mentioned earlier in this thread about interfering with net access.
I reported my problems to Consumer's Union and recommended some additional test procedures they should use in rating PC security packages.
I have to ask how many of the people reporting problems on this thread with any AV product had attempted to replace either another manufacturer's pre-installed package or another manufacturer's package they had themselves put on earlier.
I find all anti-viruses to be absolutely worthless, because no matter what they are, they never completely protect your system. Yes, I had NOD32, and it failed, and it failed for several people I know.
The best way to protect yourself is to use common practices. Don't go to ad-ridden sites, don't open crazy executables, and one of the best things you can do is to buy a cheap router. It doesn't have to be wireless, but the cheapest router has a firewall built in that is more powerful than the most expensive software firewall.
Usually the freeware programs get rid of most your problems. What I use consists of Spybot S + D plus Ad-Aware. Scan your system using them both one at a time, and if you stumble across a major virus, the Internet community usually has the answers needed to get rid of them.
Worse comes to worse, writing zero's to the HDD and reinstall your OS always works too
Yeah, that's why I mentioned Kaspersky in my post last page. That's what I used to clean up after the only NOD32 failure I have ever seen. Still an AMAZING track record for NOD32, but that's why it slipped to #2 on my list.
Agreed 100%. A hardware firewall prevents those scanning the Internet for computers with holes from even detecting that you are there. Everyone I have ever seen who was infected from the OUTSIDE was NOT running a hardware firewall.
Sorry, to me that's like saying "I found *all* body armor worthless, because it doesn't protect against shots to the head."
And hey, if you're in an environment where you don't have to worry about anyhting but snipers, that may be a legitimate point. However, there's an old army joke "It's not the bullet with my name on it that scares me. It's the one labeled 'To whom it may concern' ... "
Most of the viruses you run across are not the latest uber-bug, it's bs from a script-kiddy that hacked a website you frequent. It doesn't get in because of some secret unpatched hole in the OS, it get's in because you did something mildly dumb that you would get away with 99.9% of the time. Sadly, there is as good or better a chance of that virus killing your computer as there is of some 'code Red' worm written by the chinese mafia.
But, unlike the mythical uber worm, it will be stopped by that extra layer of protection that is an anti-virus.
So Sure - an antivirus won't protect you from everything, anymore than body armor will. It *Will* protect you from the items labeled "To whom it may concern".
Jonnan
Nice post. Good points.
-Teal
Norton have come a long way in the past couple of years and their 2009 models are very efficient, effective and very light on resources. They had a good product about 5 years ago and it went to 'rat shit' but now they are back with an excellent product. I've been using NIS for the past few months during beta and since full release and I'm amazed at the 'come back'. Many of their customers, from the early years, left and went to NOD, Kaspersky and AVG etc but it looks like they are going to start making ground again in the Security market place with a very polished product.
That's like saying house doors are useless because a determined criminal might get through anyways.
Jonnan001's metaphor works as well .
Nothing's 100%, not even a router. That's why security experts generally recommend several layers of security. Putting all of your eggs into one type of security solution is generally not a good idea.
I personally have antivirus, a hardware router, a software firewall, DEP, and even UAC active on my system. Each protects against certain classes of attacks, and together they provide a pretty good security solution. In case of failure, I have backups and am moving towards having offsite backups as well.
And the best common practice is to use multiple layers of security .
They're both good in different ways. A router does a good job at filtering a lot of internet "junk" so your computer doesn't have to waste a lot of its own resources cleaning the junk. A software firewall can tell which connections are connected to which applications and can detect when a new (possibly rogue) application is trying to send packets.
I actually use my computer for real work and store actual information of value on my system. I'd have to restore it from a backup as well. In addition, reinstalling the OS takes time, and I'd rather not get infected in the first place.
You mean you've never encountered a person who got a virus in an email?
These days they're bypassing hardware firewalls by hitching a ride onto something that is normally let through the firewall, such as web pages and emails.
I just wanted to throw out a new one... has anyone here tried Vipre antivirus? the reviews are great... and it's cheap...
I have uninstalled and replaced Norton, AVG, and Avast. The only one I have really had trouble with is Norton. It's simply ridiculous to have to download and run a "removal" program after running the uninstaller. I never had a problem uninstalling and replacing AVG or Avast. Norton actually left processes running after an uninstall.
I'm skeptical...but it would be great if Norton got back into the competition once again. Competition always makes products better.
again? I remeber using Norton 10 years ago... and I had to uninstall it because it made my computer unbearably slow... I hope they go out of business... lol and 5 years ago... the same... I hate norton...
sorry for being a troll...