Windows 10 Which Anti Virus?

I'm no anti-virus programmer but I would think that this is where "vulnerability scans" known and potential avenues malware can take would come into play, "behavior" scans would also come into play, "cloud" based scanning. You're right if there's no known signature then a signature based scan wouldn't work. However there are know signatures for know malware and just abandoning them wouldn't be prudent either or not using signatures once they are made.

I get what you're saying but I don't agree that just stopping the use of signatures is prudent nor security minded when taking a holistic look at it.

My home systems don't use signatures at all other than my firewall. We are also moving away from signatures at work.

A vulnerability scanner is a completely different type of product
This is one of the better ones, plus there is a free version you can run at home. (needs a dedicated box)Nessus Vulnerability Scanner

Kaspersky and BitDefender have vulnerability scanners as I'm sure a lot of the AAA AV programs do.

Hm, I've never heard of Nessus, I'll give it a look.

More power to you man if you prefer to go that route. For me, I prefer having that aspect for my computer security.

I run local AV (Webroot), a UTM (Unified Threat Management Applications) at my border, I have a IPS running off a network tap. A SIEM with HID clients on my systems. I have quite a bit of protection and network monitoring/alerts on my network

Yeah I'd definitely say you do, lol, that's pretty cool.

Neemobeer said:

I run local AV (Webroot), a UTM (Unified Threat Management Applications) at my border, I have a IPS running off a network tap. A SIEM with HID clients on my systems. I have quite a bit of protection and network monitoring/alerts on my network

Click to expand...

Do you work from home as well Neem's?

No, but a lot of what I work on is info sec related. Because of that I like to stay current on my tech. That and malware reverse engineering is a hobby of mine so I need to watch my network closely in case something gets loose from a VM

I use SUPERAntiSpyware to occasionally scan my computer, as well as Malwarebyte's web protection and real-time shield. Then I use Webroot's site protection and firewall. That trio has served me well over the years and I highly recommend using that. A recent antivirus showed that the top defenders were BitDefender and Avast. Out of my experience with them, BitDefender is a lot better than Avast. I'm not too worried about viruses because I do most of my daily computer work inside of a virtual machine running Windows XP Professional SP3 (32-bit).

@Lynxis I've never heard of SuperAntiSpyware thanks for mentioning. This is a reason why I enjoy threads like this, getting person recommendations and personal user experience accounts. I have a hard time trusting AV reviews because most review sites get those free review copies because they aren't too critical, 100% honest with their reviews. And if they give a bad review those companies won't send any more review copies. Just like the YouTube tech reviews more like unboxing rather than a critique.

Galaxy S7 Edge

I have had no problems with Avast altho I do use the free version.It is best to use the boot scan.

personal share . do not check your email by the attchment . especial the one you do not know . last week my friend just get infected by the virus in the attachment . by the way , for security , you can use some paid anti virus , like Avast , Norton etc ..

You might want to check some reviews out there is this one but do check out Cnet as well.Antivirus Software - 2016 Reviews of Free and Paid Versions

@Age thanks for the link amigo!

Its a tough choice as I've had Norton, Mcafee and Avast but still there are gaps in the coverage over time. I am sticking with Norton 360 right now and I have added a SafeCLIX to that for web browsing and I'm much better now. Norton still costs to much though.

Age said:

You might want to check some reviews out there is this one but do check out Cnet as well.Antivirus Software - 2016 Reviews of Free and Paid Versions

Click to expand...

>>>This antivirus review takes 3 of the worst AV's out there (Kaspersky, Bitdefender, and Avira) and tells you they are the best. Avast is in their list, but only on Mobile devices, not PCs. That's terrible, because some of the worst infected computers I get from Customers have any of those 3 recommended as "BEST". These 3 AV programs don't do as well on the AV-TEST review, which is a much more reliable independent AV testing firm. Of course, the real test is what is the infection rate of a given AV program on a much larger sample of computers. I have over 200 computers running Avast (both free and paid) and I have less than a 1% infection rate. The other AV programs that are highly rated, such as Kaspersky, Bitdefender, Avira, and ESET Nod32; are more like 10% infection rate or higher. I think Kaspersky is more like 50% infection rate. Every computer I've seen in the last 5 years with that on it is so completely filled with viruses and spyware, a drive wipe must be done and Windows reinstalled to get rid of all the viruses Kaspersky let through. Take a look at these test results from AV-TEST: AV-TEST – The Independent IT-Security Institute

What I noticed here for the Aug 2016 AV-TEST results are that the top 3 rated AV programs; Kaspersky, Bitdefender, and TrendMicro are all listed as the best. I personally cannot concur on these results, as laboratory testing is not the same as true use in the field. TrendMicro paid does a good job, but not as good as Norton Security Deluxe or Avast Premiere in my experience. I believe that Kaspersky and Bitdefender especially are paying the AV-TEST guys to rate their programs much higher than they really perform in reality. Having deployed AVs in large corporate networks for 30+ years, there is something wrong there. There are Zero Fortune500 companies using Kaspersky or Bitdefender on their business networks. If they were that good, wouldn't Fortune500 companies have adopted and begun using those products to protect their computers? <<<
<<<BBJ>>>

@BIGBEARJEDI I absolutely agree with you in that these AV tests from sites like CNET are very dubious!

I'm curious about your customers that had heavily infected computers, that had the AAA brand AVs if it was caused via user error, the user creating a situation on their computers which lead to the heavy infections. Or if it was entirely because the AV's failed to stop or prevent it. Because even at a 10% rate a heavily infected computer would have to have spyware upon spyware but the kind that someone downloading despite the AV warnings. Just curious, thanks.

Hi there Lobo,
Thanks. In a couple of cases, it was human error, as one of my Clients used to give all 3 of her laptops to her Grandkids in lieu of babysitting them (she has 6 grandkids). The teenagers when they would come over would each take a laptop and go into one of her bedrooms AND LOCK THE DOOR! They wouldn't come out for days. When she called me to fix the laptops, the AVs were always uninstalled or disabled at the least as they all knew that AVs slowed down their online gaming sessions. I told her that they shouldn't be left unattended to do whatever they want to the computers in private with no parental guidance. She simply ignored me, and kept giving me the broken laptops to fix always with the same type of problem==the AVs uninstalled. I needed the money, so I just gave up and shutup and just fixed them!

This Customer was also one who had paid Kaspersky, and even on her laptops where the gkids didn't uninstall it; it got huge infection counts! I have other Customers on paid Bitdefender, McAfee, Avira, etc. with the same thing. Kaspersky seems to be the most vulnerable out of all the 20 or so that my Customers use here where I live. My opinion is that Kaspersky just doesn't stop the bad stuff, the same with ESET NOD, and Avira, and even McAfee. I see lots and lots of infected computers with those products on them, and in some cases the engines are out of date, and the updates are broken or disabled; but usually, they are working and the viruses/malware, especially RANSOMWARE breezes by them like they weren't even there.

This is not the case with Norton, Avast, or TrendMicro products. Again, our other esteemed colleagues here don't seem to ever have these kinds of large infection rates on their own computers and many here on WF use only WD (Windows Defender) and claim they haven't gotten a virus in 15 years, which I find kind of hard to believe. Just for fun, I go out and find and download viruses and throw them at my test machines, perhaps I have a different perspective than they do. I don't know. I can only tell you about my experiences, not theirs.

<<<BBJ>>>

BBJ, thanks for the reply!
I'm seriously interested in this topic for several reasons.
1. I'm a GEEK! Lol
2. I'm considering moving from Kaspersky for something with less of a footprint. But also that doesn't have a bunch of security software, for me, I don't need. For example the newest update provides a basic VPN (I already have one, PIA), Kaspersky installs some browser plug-ins, it has a sandboxed browser plugin for when you visit banking or Amazon to protect information from key logging, and several others. These are great for non tech people. But I have no use for those services.
3. I have elementary school aged niños that need to use a computer for school.

So these specific stories and experiences bring up are helpful.

Question: out of Norton, Avast, and TrendMicro which firewall gives detailed information and allowed for customization? I really like Kaspersky's firewall and it's features.

Thanks!


Galaxy S7 Edge

Here are some AV testing and review websites for everyone's reference.
Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - AV-Comparatives
Virus Bulletin :: Home
Home - NSS Labs, Inc
AV-TEST – The Independent IT-Security Institute
MRG

And I really enjoy watching The PC Security Channel
Long form AV testing, free versions, paid versions, ransom ware tool testing, side by side AV testing.

I do like TrendMicro's effectiveness and I used it for around 4 years. It's still very good and BBJ it right it's nearly as effective as Norton but not quite. The problem with Trend is it's memory footprint although with today's machines it's a mute point for the most part. I recently switched to Webroot, but I would have no issue using either both are very effective anti-virus solutions IMO. Trend does not include a firewall (total protection) but that's a mute point windows software firewall is very good in my opinion if configured correctly, and adding to that most computer savvy folks also use a NAT enabled router and also have that locked down. Alternatively you can simply run Windows 10 build in defender and alternate online scanning on a few sites (housecall-norton) to augment it and that solution works fine for a lot of folks.