Ask Slashdot: Best Anti-Virus Software In 2015? Free Or Paid? 467
CryoKeen writes: I got a new laptop recently after trading in my old laptop for store credit. While I was waiting to check out, the sales guy just handed me some random antivirus software (Trend Micro) that was included with the purchase. I don't think he or I realized at the time that the CD/DVD he gave me would not work because my new laptop does not have a CD/DVD player.
Anyway, it got me wondering whether I should use it or not. Would I be better off downloading something like Avast or Malwarebytes? Is there one piece of antivirus software that's significantly better than the others? Are any of the paid options worthwhile, or should I just stick to the free versions? What security software would you recommend in addition to anti-virus?
Anyway, it got me wondering whether I should use it or not. Would I be better off downloading something like Avast or Malwarebytes? Is there one piece of antivirus software that's significantly better than the others? Are any of the paid options worthwhile, or should I just stick to the free versions? What security software would you recommend in addition to anti-virus?
In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:3, Insightful)
Because I'm assuming that will be an answer.
You can fill in any particular OS as an alternative.
Re: In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Funny)
Wipe the disk and run linux
Re: In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Haha, if you're going to use a *nix system, you might as well go with one that you actually control.
Re: In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:4, Insightful)
That's a cute but transparent attempt to sidestep the issue.
Apple says if I buy a computer from them, they'll place arbitrary restrictions on what I can do with it. This means that it might not do things that I tell it to do. This also means that it might do other arbitrary things that I don't tell it to do, or even that I tell it not to do.
You might consider these acceptable terms for the use of your general-purpose computer. I do not consider them such for mine.
Re:In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Informative)
That would be "in before somebody says 'don't run Windows'".
Having said that, I've run Windows (among other things) for years, and haven't run anti-virus in over a decade for two reasons:
- it's more trouble than it's worth when you know what you're doing,
- it's hard to do any kind of virus research at all when you've got antivirus trying to delete every infected file you're examining.
In the time I've not run a/v, I've never had an infection. (I never had an infection before that, either, but that's beside the point.)
I use Comodo Endpoint Security on the kids' computer, and the HTPC, but my main Windows desktop hasn't had it for years, and won't have it for the foreseeable future, either.
All my Linux machines, of course, don't run anything, except for my mail server, which has ClamAV on it, just to scan attachments.
Re: (Score:3)
All my Linux machines, of course, don't run anything.
Don't worry, I have it on good authority that next year will be the Year of Desktop Linux, and then all those apps will appear and you'll have things to run on your Linux machine.
Re:In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
To the average Windows user, their computer is a means to an end.
As an outside observer, that end appears to be to run as much anti-virus/anti-malware as possible.
Yaz
Re:In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Insightful)
That you know of. There have been many documented cases of drive-by installs, worms that infect from external media, infected installers from legitimate installers. Hell, even legitimate open source projects having their servers unknowingly hijacked and malware injected into source or binaries during download.
While some malware is geared at spamming your desktop with ads, the good stuff tries to be as unnoticeable as possible, especially for botnets or if the goal is keylogging. Today's sophisticated viruses aren't trying to wipe your machine - they're all about creating networks of vulnerability to sell later to the highest bidder.
Re:In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Informative)
I use visual and audible cues like an oddly running HDD: going by the activity light mostly using SSDs.
Because a botnet is going to need a lot of hard drive on your computer with GB of extra RAM?
Also, fan operation, CPU temp, resource monitoring stuff.
Unless you've been coopted to mine bitcoins or something, your CPU temperature isn't going to be noticeable if your part of a botnet either.
Just checking out what .exes are running and/or in startup once in a while is a good habit.
Sure it is; for the low hanging fruit. The really good stuff doesn't show up in taskmanager because its told windows not to report it. It doesn't show up in the registry editor either. And windows explorer can't see the files on disk. Or maybe it's hiding in plain sight... some common service replaced by a malware version; that still performs all the original functions, but also does something... extra.
The idea that anyone could detect anything sophisticated with "visual cues" and "checking stuff" is laughable; on any OS.
An offline scan is usually required, that flags everything not known specifically to come from a trusted vendor... and the resulting list is probably going to be overwhelming anyway for the average person / average system. Only the most secure managed environments would be able have any real confidence.
Re: (Score:2)
If this botnet is that good then unless you can monitor all your traffic to and from the suspected infected system with a separate, knowingly uncompromised system. I think a good botnet would be dormant offline and invisible to the kernel, making an offline scan using the suspected system to inspect itself useless as well. If this awesome botnet gets me, hey...oh well.
Re: (Score:2)
If this botnet is that good then unless you can monitor all your traffic to and from the suspected infected system with a separate, knowingly uncompromised system.
Pretty much. Yes. Unless its designed to overload your centrifuges and not communicate with the internet.
I think a good botnet would be dormant offline and invisible to the kernel, making an offline scan using the suspected system to inspect itself useless as well.
Which is I said it needed to be an offline scan.
If this awesome botnet gets me, h
Re: (Score:3)
Don't forget checking the state tables on your router every once in a while.
Oh...that's right; most routers don't actually let you see that information. You have to be running something actually, you know, useful. Like pfSense.
Re: (Score:2)
- it's hard to do any kind of virus research at all when you've got antivirus trying to delete every infected file you're examining.
What kind of special flower does "virus research" on their "main" computer that they use for ANY thing else? I don't even look at them on a NETWORK that has access to anything else.
I agree that a/v products value is dubious at best. But good god man... your basically telling us the equivalent of "I don't bother with brakes in my daily commuter car because I like to study car wr
Re: (Score:3)
You don't need no brakes on your car to study what happens to some other guy when they crash their car.
Similarly, I don't need antivirus on my computer to reverse engineer the infected files I pulled from a client machine; which, incidentally, their antivirus said was clean, and I found them manually. (But wait! How did you find them without the antivirus telling you that they were infected?! That's unpossible!!! <head explodes>)
Re:In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Insightful)
Repeat: Best software = None.
There are people out there (many of my friends included) who need protection from such a thing because they can't put the tiniest amount of thought into what they are doing when on their computer. I do not practice safe browsing by any means, torrents and pr0n are just too much fun to leave alone ;-), but somehow manage to never get infected without any A/V software protecting me BUT I keep getting calls from friends who's machines have turned into rotting cesspools and want them cleaned. Honestly my answer lately is "Call Geek squad" because it's not worth my time or energy to scrub their waste pond just to have it rot again shortly there after and Geek Squad is cheaper than my time if I were to bill them. So for these people A/V software may be useful but honestly again most of them already have it and it didn't keep them safe anyway.
A/V DOES otoh slow down your machine, interfere with properly running processes and generally behave like the worst of viruses on its own so why willingly go down that path.
Re: In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Informative)
Wow just, wow.
Guess you never heard of a flash exploit before? You probably think a user only has to click on something to be 0wned?
Go to any major website and you will get 0wned if an ad network is hit.
That is beyond ignorant and very dangerous advice.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's why NoScript, Ghostery, and FlashBlock are critical pieces of security software.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess you never heard about ghostery, adblock, noscript et al?
Essentially all flash exploits come from very specific kinds of flash elements, and those are blocked by aforementioned software. For me, it's the primary reason to run adblocker. Safety.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I also run AdBlock for safety first, and to remove ads I will never click on anyway second. AdBlock is the most important security software for surfing the internet.
I'm sorry about the websites that depend on ad revenue. But if the advertising companies can't get their shit together and instead abstract their business model in such a way that it's impossible to know where an ad is coming from, it's their fault not mine.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know about Matheus, but I do hear about Flash exploits but I still don't use anti-virus software. It's just safer and easier to remove Flash from your computer. Same goes for Java. And since I use OS X I don't need Adobe Reader on my system either, so that's three of the biggest security holes completely removed from my system.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, once I sorted out your bizarre punctuation and capitalization, I realized I agree with you.
Every one of my computers has Sandboxie installed. It's one of the tools I used when analyzing malware, when I want to see exactly what it does to the machine.
Re:In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't execute virus files on my work computer. That would be stupid. I decompile/reverse engineer/etc them.
I have a separate computer that I use if I need to actively infect one. It's not a VM (for the exact reason that some posters have already given) but I do have a Clonezilla image of it, so I can quickly wipe/reinstall after analyzing the infection.
Re:Rathaus (Score:2)
It especially explains why many colleges (at least before the US drinking age was raised to 21) have bars called "The Rathskeller", pronounced "Rat Cellar".
Re:In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, so you're this guy [xkcd.com].
Re: (Score:3)
It's parked in the garage.
Re: In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Informative)
I agree. That's exactly what virtual machines excel at.
Any malware worth its salt will detect a VM (and the presence of debuggers and other things) and refuse to run. You need to be running on a physical machine to do malware analysis.
Re: In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:4, Funny)
Oh good. Didn't realize my virtualized servers are all virus proof.
Re: In after somebody says don't run Windows. (Score:5, Interesting)
So how do I configure my graphics designer's Windows box to look like a VM so that the malware won't run?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Any active AV software worth 5 seconds of attention watches the resident virtual memory ranges of all processes on the computer, they pick up virus signatures in both local processes and things running inside VMs unless you're running some kind of cheap AV software from the 90s that simply scans your non-volatile memory systems.
I've never heard of AV software scanning all memory pages of all processes. It seems like that would be hugely expensive in terms of CPU resources because a VM can easily touch many gigabytes of RAM in a very short term, and somehow the AV software has to compare this entire dirty page set against a database containing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of potential virus signatures. Without help from the hypervisor, it seems like this would be even harder since when it sees a dirty page, it has no idea
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
his non-existent scanning tools never found anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Hardy har har. I'm pretty sure you were trying to be funny.
But, just in case you, or any of the other similar comments were actually being serious:
Maybe that actually meant "don't run anything resembling antivirus software," since, you know, that's what the thread and the article are all about.....
If nothing else (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed. I'm actually an AVG reseller for many years. I always loved them when they just stuck to what they were good at, which was solid, lightweight antivirus protection (they held out longer than most). I guess it's inevitable that they will get dollar signs in their eyes and try to produce and sell everything else under the sun (PC Tune-up, Web Tune-up, Internet Security, Anti-Spam, Firewall, blah blah blah).. Ever since they did that, their core Antivirus offering got pushed aside and now they sell adwa
Re:If nothing else (Score:5, Informative)
Even the paid version of AVG now spams pop-up advertisements. Definitely do not go with that.
I tend to use AV comparatives as one place to compare how anti-virus products are stacking up:
http://www.av-comparatives.org... [av-comparatives.org]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
One of the main reasons i got rid of BitDefender. They started popping shit up on your screen even though I had a paid version. Fuck that.
No need (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows? Use Security Essentials and practice safe surfing. No need for anything else.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows? Use Security Essentials and practice safe surfing. No need for anything else.
This.
Re: (Score:2)
For personal use?
You don't need an anti-virus program. It's a racket. Use the built-in protections for your OS, and learn some common sense. If you do something that gets you infected, wipe and reload your OS, and DON'T DO THAT AGAIN. Once you have a trimmed group of common, trusted applications and games and settings, you'll be cruising fine. You'll more likely be wiping and reloading your OS due to hardware failures every few years than from virus attacks. Notice that you will need to make backups a
Re: (Score:3)
I think the studies show that MSE is by far the least effective... but none of the others are anything like 100% either.
Re: (Score:3)
EMET (also from MS) is free and effective at preventing many 0-day vulnerabilities.
Re: (Score:2)
Security Essentials is worthless. It used to be decent years ago but is one of the poorer performing Antivirus products now. For Free Panda is supposed to perform well. Really anything but MSSE is a good idea, regardless of how safe you surf. Just because you only visit "safe" sites doesn't mean malware isn't being handed out via some drive by advert.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Uh, no. The people who recommend MSSE recommend it because they are capable of safe-browsing. MSSE will be more than effective if you don't click every link you see.
Re: Seriously??? (Score:2)
Really? You do not run Javascript or flash at all? Wow ... here is a hint. 2001 is when you clicked on an attachment to get infected. Today open IE and an infected ad server will 0wn your machine.
Re:Seriously??? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes. Because these tests are pure FUD generation. These "tests" are designed specifically to give high marks to AV kit that has its heuristics engine to produce as many false positives as possible and low marks to AV kit that has a reasonable heuristics engine that looks for realistic threats and doesn't spam user with "this is a potential threat, upgrade for 9.99 now to fix" advertisements.
Reminder - home users aren't threatened by latest custom tailored malware. They are threatened by well known mass-produced threats like bitlocker. And MSE catches those just fine.
Re:Seriously??? (Score:4, Insightful)
Nevermind that most heuristics engines will at one point or another detect a standard (Microsoft-signed) required Windows file as a virus and promptly "quarantine" it for you. Which just means Windows will either bluescreen or render your system unusable.
And that's a problem - because now AV is interfering with your computer - and if it isn't a Windows binary that gets hosed, it's a file one of your programs you use.
No, MSE will not catch a 0 day. No antivirus can. So they use heuristics to bridge the time between it's in the wild and when they push an update that will detect it. But there's a tradeoff - too aggressive and there will be a TON of false positives. More conservative (Like MSE) and you'll be more likely to miss a threat, but less likely that you'll clobber a file you really need. And for most people, that's more than acceptable tradeoff.
Especially when you combine it with safe surfing that blocks questionable URLs - available on every browser now (either powered by Google or Microsoft) that prevent you from grabbing questionable files.
Nag, nag, nag, nag (Score:3, Informative)
for windows read below (Score:2, Insightful)
The Best AV for Windows is Microsoft Security essentials which is available for Free from Microsoft for private use. Make sure your OS and apps are not left without security updates. Use Secunia PSI or alternatively Qualys browser check both free for private use. One last thing, don't use an account with admin privileges but one that has limited rights, so if your box gets pwned the attackerhas to escalate privileges before he or she can run as admin/root.
Re: for windows read below (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft Security Essentials is Windows Defender is System Center Endpoint Protection.
Definition updates come out every few hours.
They all catch the vast majority of shit.
EMET (also free and from MS) will prevent many of the 0-day vulnerabilities that MSE/WD/SCEP could miss until the next definition update rolls out.
Windows Defender + Malwarebytes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, this is the combo I used. Never had a problem with it. (Actually, had one malware problem before I added Malwarebytes, but used that to remove it and have had it installed ever since.) ..bruce..
Re:Not in my experience (Score:5, Informative)
Non-intrusive... and ineffective. I just cleaned up my brother-in-law's machine and that was what he was using.
My preferred approach is to use Avira Free (installed with ninite.com), MalwareBytes, HiJackThis, and the no-ads hosts file from mvps.
Secondary, install Google Chrome with adblock and a good no-script type program (though I personally just use Ghostery with AdBlock)
If treating for malware, bleepingcomputer is the site to go to. Run RKill, followed by ComboFix, ADWCleaner, and TDSSKiller.
This takes care of 99% of the issues, assuming you don't HAVE to continually visit some obscure Russian porn sites.
Re: (Score:2)
MBAM's realtime shit isn't free.
So it doesn't help until you know you've been hit.
Disagree! (Score:3)
Malware Bytes? Yes.... Great product that really is pretty effective (especially if you can boot into "safe mode" in Windows first) at cleaning up malware.
But Windows Defender? Absolutely not. It got ranked absolute worst at detecting malware in a head to head test last year vs. something like 40 other products on the market! And just from personal experience trying to keep PCs clean in an office setting with a lot of mobile workers? It didn't even trigger on some heavily infected machines.
Personally, we u
Malwarebytes? (Score:2)
trade-in (Score:2)
who the hell takes trade-in laptops?
New Laptop? Windows? (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought the included (pre-installed) Microsoft Windows Defender (or Windows Security Essentials) was already good enough.
That, plus not installing every stupid piece of malware-studded "freeware" I come across and being a bit conservative in my browsing, has always been enough since Windows 7.
Windows after 7 also has a built-in software firewall, so wouldn't seem like you'd need one of those either.
I just can't picture needing anything beyond that.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I thought the included (pre-installed) Microsoft Windows Defender (or Windows Security Essentials) was already good enough.
Microsoft is rather notorious for not releasing information about known bugs or malware until they damned well please. That means until then, it doesn't get added to Security Essential or Windows Defender until such time, even if the security community knew about it for 2 years.
While 3rd-party solutions can be problematic, as others have mentioned, at the same time they are likely to update their lists of malware considerably faster than Microsoft in many cases.
Re:New Laptop? Windows? (Score:4, Informative)
I just can't picture needing anything beyond that.
While technically not an "antivirus" product in the conventional sense, Microsoft's Enhanced Mitigation Experience Toolkit [microsoft.com] adds a significant layer of defense on top of Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the included (pre-installed) Microsoft Windows Defender (or Windows Security Essentials) was already good enough.
Yeah, it pretty much is. The reason to go with something else, or in addition, is largely if you're in a business setting and you want to be able to push updates and monitor results. Also, I'm not sure about the current situation, but last I checked, MSE was free for personal use but not licensed for business use...?
But for home use, MSE is probably good enough. It also doesn't have popups, it doesn't break any apps or anything in the OS, and it doesn't take up tons of system resources. Ultimately, wit
Trend Micro isn't bad really... (Score:2)
However it depends on how recent it is and how complete a solution it provides. I've used it in the Enterprise IT arena in the past (I've been in enterprise IT for a couple of decades now) and it worked well, both on servers and desktops. Last year though when I purchased a new laptop (my first Windows laptop in years) I looked around for a while and settled on Norton 360. I thought it provided the most complete solution, had decent reviews and I got it at a steal of a price - something like $20 on Amazon a
none at all. (Score:2)
You are not going to find anyyhing that does it all the best. You also cannot run more than one antivirus at a time. Well, you can but i will make hou wish you never thought of the idea. And no- malware bytes is not an antivirus.
You would be better served learning safe habbits and monitoring tech sites dealing with infections while not expecting a best product. Do this anyways if someone convinces you thay there is a best.
Microsoft Security Essentials (Score:5, Insightful)
A while back i tried NOD32 and was very impressed. I don't know if it's still good.
My Experience (Score:4, Insightful)
For Windows 8 there is no need as Microsoft Security Essentials, renamed Windows Defender, is good enough. Otherwise I use Avast, which seems to work well and comes with a few handy options like a software updater and the option to run a scan at boot time. Though it can be annoying recently as it reminds you of other paid features like VPN tunnels.
Steer clear of Norton for God's sake, it seems as bad as the disease itself. I dislike Symentec and had problems in the past with AVG. A few years back an update prevented browsers from accessing the internet.
If you think you may be infected try running a scan of the free version of Malwarebytes, it gives a good second opinion and is great at cleaning up some infections.
Avast is OK (Score:3)
I used to use AVG until it became bloatware, then I tried Avira and it seemed to suffer stability problems, switched to Avast which was OK and didn't seem to slow things down, and then removed that when I realised how much FUD the antivirus industry uses to sell its products, and how piss-poor their products are at doing their job.
I've seen malware infections - from trivial all the way up to cryptolocker - manage to get past the "big 3" (norton/symantec, McAfee, and Trend Micro), and AVG. The only products who seem to be stable and maintain a small-ish footprint are Eset and Kaspersky.
I leave Windows defender switched on, scan once every few months with free malwarebytes, keep Cryptoprevent updated, and anything else I can remove with Combofix - not that I've had anything in over 2 years, but Combofix is what I use to repair customers' machines, then I leave them with a copy of free malwarebytes, and Cryptoprevent.
My 2 cents: avast, MWB, ABP, noscript, sandboxie (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm on Windows 7. Here are my tips:
1) I have run avast real-time for years. I'm a pretty wary, sophisticated user. But it has occasionally blocked malicious elements on webpages. And it once blocked a zip attachment that I got sucked in on with a phishing email before any harm was done. I have also had it give me a few false positives over the years, which are a bit disconcerting to see and annoying until you can get things sorted out.
2) Second, I run malwarebytes scans from time to time.
3) Other prevention: adblock plus and noscript plugins.
4) For seemingly dangerous websites that I still want to be able to access, I use a Sandboxie sandbox for the browser.
Avirea (www.free-av.com) Is Great (Score:4, Interesting)
I've used Avira (free-av.com) for years (since Windows XP at least), both on my computers and my friends' and family's, and I've never gotten a virus despite visiting Bit Torrent and other questionable sites.
It's 100% free and it doesn't install malware (though it might optionally install some crapware, I forget). The only downside is that they pop an alert maybe once a day or so with different messages (the point of which is clearly to prod you to purchase the paid version). I strongly recommend getting the paid version to make those alerts go away ... but I'm embarrassed to admit that I haven't actually done as much myself (sorry Avira!).
Re: (Score:2)
Crap, typo in my subject line: should be "Avira".
Thoughts on Windows Virtual PC? (Score:2)
What do people think of the security of using Windows 7's Virtual PC feature with "undo hard disks"?
Is this an effective VM? It sure is simpler to get running than a separate VirtualBox or similar.
Re: (Score:2)
What do people think of the security of using Windows 7's Virtual PC feature with "undo hard disks"?
Is this an effective VM? It sure is simpler to get running than a separate VirtualBox or similar.
Virtual PC is basically the worst mainstream virtual machine software that there is. Its video driver is unstable, unreliable crap compared even to virtualbox, which in turn is unstable, unreliable crap compared to vmware. If you want a virtual machine that you can count on, you need vmware. Of course, if you want snapshots, you need workstation. Otherwise, you have to make ordinary backups of your VM files.
Re: (Score:2)
What about from a security perspective though? It works well enough for me for the rare times I need it, but I wonder if it is effective at isolation?
Install an ad blocker (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows 8 includes AV (Score:2)
OP didn't mention whether it's Windows 7 or 8, but Windows 8 includes A/V out of the box. Lots of other good security best practices listed here, as well.
ClamWin (Score:5, Interesting)
ClamWin, the windows port of ClamAV which is relied on for mail scanning on just about every Linux/UNIX mail server you run across.
I think there may be a better front end that uses the ClamAV database as well, but I tend to just install ClamWin and call it a day.
Re: (Score:3)
Clamwin is not an active scanner and relies on it manually being ran and then removing any unwanted stuff manually.
I actually consider that a major selling point (along with being free.) Since ClamWin is non-intrusive, it happily coexists with other AV products, though some of them complain about it when your install them. So, I use ClamWin in conjunction with whatever commercial anti-virus product I happen to be running at the moment as a secondary check when I download things. It can also be used to do a second independent quick system scan.
I don't know if adding on ClamWin actually makes me any safer, but at least
EMET (Score:2)
I like ESET, especially the business version with console. I get it for my large customers.
Kaspersky is good. I use it for email gateways and small offices. The firewall breaks some shit, though.
I'm always removing viruses from computers that are running avast!, McAfee, Symantec, and AVG, so I won't be using those anytime soon
Trend Micro seems to be great, but I only have a couple of users running it so I have never u
Re: (Score:2)
BitDefender (Score:3)
All Antivirus Sucks. (Score:2)
All antivirus sucks, the only difference is how much you pay for it. You give me an PC with any combination of AV product(s) and 15 minutes and I'll give you an infected box, and it won't just be an Adware / Crapware infection. It will be a Screw you type of Cryptovirus or some serious credential stealing backdoor.
That being said, I use MSE / Windows 8 Defender simply because it's free and the least intrusive of the free AV's and it works great as a canary since every Virus attacks MSE / Defender first and
Start by being intelligent with your login (Score:4, Insightful)
Small Business - WebRoot (Score:2)
If you are running a small business AD environment, especially if its virtualised, we've had a good experience with webroot. Pushing it out via group policy, easy to manage and track centrally via its webconsole and doesn't kill your shared network storage.
Plays nice with other virus checkers to, we also use malware bytes free for random scans of desktops.
Security Essentials + MalwareBytes (Score:2)
Running Security Essentials + MalwareBytes for close to 5 years now.
Sophos (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Your Linux distro of choice (free) (Score:3)
Need to run special software tied to the OS? No? ... Install Linux.
Really, it's that easy.
Ubuntu can be a drag, in more ways than one, but it's worth a try - and it does look really cool. Seriously.
Suse and Redhat are hassle-free to install aswell. All three are definitly more hassle-free than any Windows installation you can do thesse days.
I've got Ubuntu 14.04 on my ThinkPad. And while it can be anoying (which OS isn't?), it is way ahead of Windows in usability and you can get tons of books and free info on the web for it.
Other than that I'd recommend Mac OS X or Chrome OS - but since you already have your laptop I guess that's ruled out.
Welcome to the camp. Enjoy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Trend Micro is top tier these days:
... and will probably remain so until tomorrow, when it'll be Kaspersky's turn, and then they get trumped by AVG, who in turn get knocked out by Avast, and then...
Asking "what's the best AV" is a loaded question, you need to qualify it in terms of best detection (as of right this minute, but not necessarily tomorrow), least naggy, least overhead, etc. Given that all AV will be defeated by 0day (in other words the determined malware will always get through no matter whose AV you have) and that I want a mach
Re: (Score:2)
"Defender" should have been "Security Essentials", forgot the changed branding.
Re: (Score:2)
Security essentials is ok and doesn't spam you, but it's just ok.
HTH,
Security Essentials used to be just ok. Over the past year or so, it's turned into the most useless piece of crap I've ever seen. I used to recommend it as a free option for some people, but lately I've been ripping it out of every machine I see it on, in the same way I used to do with Norton a few years back.
Re: (Score:2)
Not much harm because it doesn't do much either. It does so little that it ranks at the bottom of every single independent AV test, below even AV software that haven't received updates for years.
[Citation needed]
Re: (Score:2)
Kaspersky IS has signature whitelisting. If the executable isn't in the whitelist it doesn't run, period. You can configure it to completely prevent the execution of non-whitelisted exes.
You can do this for free with Group Policy shit.
I believe you can even whitelist executables based on publisher certificate, so when a new version of whatever rolls out you don't have to update the whitelist.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep - and you can automate it (partially) with Cryptoprevent from http://www.foolishit.com/ [foolishit.com]
Not connected with them other than as a satisfied user.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you mean "If you put a computer of any type online, it will become a target and someone may eventually hit the jackpot."?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I put Avast on my Windows PC and it seems to work fine. Avast prompted me to put it on my android phone as well, which I did. Since I am using Republic Wireless which is kind of persnickety about roaming data, I was not thrilled to see Avast use one Mb of roaming data the first time I left the house. I can't spare the data if it is going to do this regularly. I deleted the app.
I'm pretty good at managing my roaming data, but I can't have Avast using roaming data any damn time it wants to. This is espec
Re: (Score:2)