Security/anti-virus software

[ChuckJ]

My security software is up for renewal next month. I've been running McAfee for the last few years.

What is the best security suite now? I'm talking about something that has firewall, antivirus, etc.

[Chris_]

I use Avast! for antivirus and either the Windows firewall or AVG.  Keep a copy of Malware Bytes and CCleaner on your computer and run them regularly.

[CG6468]

I use Avast! for antivirus and either the Windows firewall or AVG.  Keep a copy of Malware Bytes and CCleaner on your computer and run them regularly.

I agree with Chris. I use the free version of Avast!, and I have Malware Bytes, Spybot & CCleaner too.

[wasp69]

I use Avast! for antivirus and either the Windows firewall or AVG.  Keep a copy of Malware Bytes and CCleaner on your computer and run them regularly.

I'll give this a shot as well.

[IassaFTots]

Same what they said.  On my laptop, and my phone.

[Maxiest]

I install Microsoft Security Essential on any clients computer I work on.  Everything else is full of a bunch of crap you don't need.  It's free and updates often.

[Zeus]

I agree with Chris. I use the free version of Avast!, and I have Malware Bytes, Spybot & CCleaner too.

I use the above except Avast.  I had heard such glowing reviews about it & finally gave it a try awhile back.  Something else on my system wouldn't play nice with Avast as it was a huge memory hog. to the point of almost bringing the system to a complete stop.

I periodically run Advanced System care 6 and Acebyte Utilities.

[FiddyBeowulf]

Panda Could protection and Malwarebytes.

[Maxiest]

My issue with McAfee, Norton, and now even AVG and Avast is they include a bunch of crap that isn't need and while providing that bunch of crap that isn't need hog tons of memory.

Look, of course this is my business, but I don't run any antivirus on some of my computers.  Most the things you will "catch" now a days are spyware and malware and 98% that can be avoided if you just use common sense and don't click on crap that is questionable.

I haven't had a real virus in a long long time.

[Dacabeti]

PC Mag and a few others rate Eset NOD32 as one of the top. I use Eset and have for years. I have yet to get a virus.

AV is a preference. Some like one, some like another. I know I will always stay away from Norton or McAfee.

for free copies of most of the AV's go to nsanedown

[Maxiest]

PC Mag and a few others rate Eset NOD32 as one of the top. I use Eset and have for years. I have yet to get a virus.

AV is a preference. Some like one, some like another. I know I will always stay away from Norton or McAfee.

for free copies of most of the AV's go to nsanedown

We have used Eset's NOD32 on multiple corporate networks that I have worked on.  It's a great product.

[ChuckJ]

I've used AVG and Avast in the past. I had some problems with one of them, but I can't remember which one or what the problem was.

These days I'm basically looking for a suite that handles everything (antivirus, firewall, etc.) and that is sort of a fire-and-forget type thing. By that I mean that it does it thing without me having to download this, that and the other or constantly change settings.

What amazes me is the differences in reviews from the different sites. One site will give product X a great rating and product Y a terrible rating. The next site will be completely reversed. Back when I was a younger dog who could still learn new tricks AND before things got so technical I could wade through the info and reach a decision. These days it's like I'm reading Greek.

[Dacabeti]

I've used AVG and Avast in the past. I had some problems with one of them, but I can't remember which one or what the problem was.

These days I'm basically looking for a suite that handles everything (antivirus, firewall, etc.) and that is sort of a fire-and-forget type thing. By that I mean that it does it thing without me having to download this, that and the other or constantly change settings.

What amazes me is the differences in reviews from the different sites. One site will give product X a great rating and product Y a terrible rating. The next site will be completely reversed. Back when I was a younger dog who could still learn new tricks AND before things got so technical I could wade through the info and reach a decision. These days it's like I'm reading Greek.

AV reviews are all about the editors preference so you have to take each one at face value.

You're not reading Greek; You're reading GEEK.

[Chris_]

AVG is a resource pig... that's why I switched over to the Windows firewall.  I haven't noticed any issues with Microsoft.  I only have issues with Avast at startup when it updates, but I got a new computer so it's not really noticeable now.

I'm still running XP at home.  My startup time from when I press the power button until I see my desktop is six seconds.  I highly recommend upgrading to a solid-state drive.

[EagleKeeper]

Two things.

If this is a Windows personal computer that will never be connected to a corporate network then I like norton antivirus 2012/2013 and the windows firewall.

The reason I say this is whenever I have ever had to look for a description of a new windows virus or malware I go to symantecs web site for their rundown.

I don't believe there is a one stop shop that will do what you are looking for but I do think that symantec has the best antivirus researchers in the world. Not only that but I think they also have the best specialized  removal tools.

So for antivirus I would put my money on norton 2013 (just the antivirus) and the windows firewall. Configure your system to update often and go out of your way to keep Java updated.(**I'm serious about this, java has some bad vulnerabilities **)

If your pc connects to a corporate network it doesn't matter because they will probably push out their chosen solution to you. But for the record "Give up hope all ye who enter here" because it's just a matter of time

I like ccleaner for the ability to clean up the browser and to a lesser extent to clean up the registry after uninstalling software.

The fact of the matter is that if your computer gets sick it is probably worthy of being refreshed from recovery media. Personally, I won't trust a computer once it proves to me it has got sick so one needs to think about their backup strategy

As far as malware bytes is concerned It has only had one chance in my experience to do it's job and it failed.

[ChuckJ]

Two things.

If this is a Windows personal computer that will never be connected to a corporate network then I like norton antivirus 2012/2013 and the windows firewall.

The reason I say this is whenever I have ever had to look for a description of a new windows virus or malware I go to symantecs web site for their rundown.

I don't believe there is a one stop shop that will do what you are looking for but I do think that symantec has the best antivirus researchers in the world. Not only that but I think they also have the best specialized  removal tools.

So for antivirus I would put my money on norton 2013 (just the antivirus) and the windows firewall. Configure your system to update often and go out of your way to keep Java updated.(**I'm serious about this, java has some bad vulnerabilities **)

If your pc connects to a corporate network it doesn't matter because they will probably push out their chosen solution to you. But for the record "Give up hope all ye who enter here" because it's just a matter of time

I like ccleaner for the ability to clean up the browser and to a lesser extent to clean up the registry after uninstalling software.

The fact of the matter is that if your computer gets sick it is probably worthy of being refreshed from recovery media. Personally, I won't trust a computer once it proves to me it has got sick so one needs to think about their backup strategy

As far as malware bytes is concerned It has only had one chance in my experience to do it's job and it failed.

Thanks EagleKeeper. This is a personal computer that is not connected to a corporate network. I've read a lot of good reviews on Norton's current product, but in the past I've heard so much bad stuff about Norton that I've been scared of it.

Is there any reason that you prefer the Windows firewall to the Norton's?

[EagleKeeper]

Thanks EagleKeeper. This is a personal computer that is not connected to a corporate network. I've read a lot of good reviews on Norton's current product, but in the past I've heard so much bad stuff about Norton that I've been scared of it.

Is there any reason that you prefer the Windows firewall to the Norton's?

To be honest I don't really care for over the other much.

I guess the difference is with either one you need to be able to do what one does on the Internet in either case, without alot of fooling around with it. The windows firewall is already there whereas with the norton firewall it would be a good thing to turn off the windows firewall to allow nortons to do it's job otherwise you would end up trying to mitigate any differences.

And for that matter, I'm not sure I see the wisdom of disabling a built in firewall in order to install a third party firewall.

But, just to carry this thought out a little further, and I do encourage any input on this. Typically an exploit can only be used against an open port on a pc, if the port is not open on the target then the exploit cannot happen. If the related ports are not open then you get nothing done because even though you might be able to send on one port the receiving port may be closed.

It's not unusual for well used protocols to use different ports or endpoints for communications. For specifics just google RFC (add your protocol here) to see how it is implemented.

In the end I think that most folkes here are right it's not a science, it is an art and your not going to find consensus either here or on the web.

I guess that's why the security industry is lucrative.

And just to wind up this post, the latest versions of Norton (just the antivirus) have a much smaller footprint and are alot faster then the older ones. Again, I think the best people that analyse malware work for Symantec but it is a war of escalation, you got thicker armor I build a bigger bomb.

Ok, just one anecdote to keep you on your toes. One time we were running symantec network security (i think) from a central server ( all it did at the time was push definitions) but on the perimeter I was running snort sensors. The sensors picked up something fishy but couldn't point to anything specific. It did give me the originating IP addresses though so I called the local admin but in the end it didn't help.

Anybody remember spybot32?

[EagleKeeper]

I also forgot to mention again (because it is important) make sure your java installation is as up to date as possible.

[ChuckJ]

To be honest I don't really care for over the other much.

I guess the difference is with either one you need to be able to do what one does on the Internet in either case, without alot of fooling around with it. The windows firewall is already there whereas with the norton firewall it would be a good thing to turn off the windows firewall to allow nortons to do it's job otherwise you would end up trying to mitigate any differences.

And for that matter, I'm not sure I see the wisdom of disabling a built in firewall in order to install a third party firewall.

But, just to carry this thought out a little further, and I do encourage any input on this. Typically an exploit can only be used against an open port on a pc, if the port is not open on the target then the exploit cannot happen. If the related ports are not open then you get nothing done because even though you might be able to send on one port the receiving port may be closed.

It's not unusual for well used protocols to use different ports or endpoints for communications. For specifics just google RFC (add your protocol here) to see how it is implemented.

In the end I think that most folkes here are right it's not a science, it is an art and your not going to find consensus either here or on the web.

I guess that's why the security industry is lucrative.

And just to wind up this post, the latest versions of Norton (just the antivirus) have a much smaller footprint and are alot faster then the older ones. Again, I think the best people that analyse malware work for Symantec but it is a war of escalation, you got thicker armor I build a bigger bomb.

Ok, just one anecdote to keep you on your toes. One time we were running symantec network security (i think) from a central server ( all it did at the time was push definitions) but on the perimeter I was running snort sensors. The sensors picked up something fishy but couldn't point to anything specific. It did give me the originating IP addresses though so I called the local admin but in the end it didn't help.

Anybody remember spybot32?

I appreciate your telling me this Eagle.

Are all firewalls essentially the same? I ask because I would figure some would be more secure, concrete, or whatever adjective you use to describe firewalls. Also, as it is part of MS os I would figure that the Windows firewall would be the first that the bad guys would work toward breaking.

  I'm sure that you can see by my terminology that I don't have a clue about firewalls other than they are needed.

[thundley4]

I also forgot to mention again (because it is important) make sure your java installation is as up to date as possible.

There have been a lot of updates recently it seems.

[Maxiest]

Still use Spybot and Malwarebytes.

And IMO, All a user needs if running Windows 7 is some common sense, the built in Windows Firewall, and Microsoft Security Essentials.

[EagleKeeper]

I appreciate your telling me this Eagle.

Are all firewalls essentially the same? I ask because I would figure some would be more secure, concrete, or whatever adjective you use to describe firewalls. Also, as it is part of MS os I would figure that the Windows firewall would be the first that the bad guys would work toward breaking.

  I'm sure that you can see by my terminology that I don't have a clue about firewalls other than they are needed.

No, all firewalls are not the same and the main difference are perimeter (meaning the *network* edges) and the OS firewalls.

One thing is that on a corporate network OS firewalls can be controlled to a certain extent (people go on vaca and turn off their PC and whatnot which does not help, just lock the workstation) but that cannot be counted on. Your best chance to avoid disaster is on the network boarder and that is if you got good security people looking at it all the time.

I know this doesn't help you, I guess it's just a little window into what is going on behind the scene.

In your case Chuck I don't know what your home network looks like but I am quite sure that it will not react to a new threat, on the other hand your Internet provider may be quite good, who knows.

The main thing to understand about the firewall on your PC is that the main consideration for the default config is to let you get your thing done with as little interruption as possible and requiring as little input from the user as possible and hope for the best. If your firewall squawked at you all the time would you be happy?

That's where being aggressive about keeping your PC updated comes in, if you can fix a vulnerability before it is exploited then you don't have to worry about the vulnerability so much.

I want to reiterate that the most desired outcome for a home owned firewall is to not bother the user so much that it gets shutdown. That in itself is a weakness that gets exploited.

[EagleKeeper]

There have been a lot of updates recently it seems.

That's exactly right, there are linux distros (linux..really, I thought linux was invulnerable) that have jave disbled by default now in there browsers.