What anti-virus software do u use?

[neoof]

Im using pc-cillin at the moment (trial version). It looks nice and comes with a firewall... But how do i know it's good enuf without sticking a few viruses up it's arse or something?

What do u use, why and what do u like about it?

[xash]

neoof, this question is better suited to IMHO.

I'll move it for you.

-xash
General Questions Moderator

[neoof]

thank u :)

[Patr100]

AVG - from www.Grisoft.com
It's free and it works.

[DeadlyAccurate]

I second Patr100's suggestion. Excellent virus protection.

[Petter]

Thirded. And it's spelled 'you' and 'enough'.

[Revtim]

I fourth AVG. Although I should note that it hasn't detected anything yet on my setup, so it hasn't really been tested.

[neoof]

Originally posted by Petter
Thirded. And it's spelled 'you' and 'enough'.

thanks.


But one cannot install the free version of said product in any network environment.

I need a personal firewall with it, really. one that's easily configured.

[PlasticVirgil]

I use PC-Cillin. And I love the virus protection. But the firewall failed Gibsons Leaktest, and I haven't really found a way to get it to pass. That is, sadly, about the extent of my knowledge in testing the quality of firewalls. :)

What I really like about PC-cillin is its a very quiet program, and doesnt interfere much with what else the computer is doing. It operates very nicely in the background and doesnt cause any noticeable slowdown.

[Chairman Pow]

I use both the online PCCilin for the occasional test and AVG. Unfortunately, neither has found a virus, so I'm paranoid that they're not working...

[sirtonyh]

I use Mcafee firewall and anti-virus which is about $100 a year or so. Seems to work pretty well but the auto-update feature is a nightmare - it always gives me a 404 error and I have to search around for the update.

[Alereon]

Chairman Pow: Create a new text file, and copy and paste the following code into it:X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*Save the file, then rename it to "avtest.com" (no quotes). Assuming your antivirus software let you do all that, double click on the file. If your antivirus software is working properly, it will freak and tell you it discovered the "EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE! Virus." Delete the file.

If you prefer, you can also download the file directly from the official Eicar website (http://www.eicar.org/download/eicar.com).

[Petter]

Originally posted by neoof
thanks.


But one cannot install the free version of said product in any network environment.

I need a personal firewall with it, really. one that's easily configured.

You're free to install it in a network environment as long as it's not a commercial one.

As for the firewall, ZoneAlarm is recommended by many (a free version for personal, non-profit use is available.)

[Petter]

From the AVG EULA
AVG Free Edition CAN NOT BE INSTALLED ON SERVERS FOR ANY REASON. IT CAN NOT BE INSTALLED IN ANY NETWORKED ENVIRONMENT!


Well, that'll teach me not to reply before reading the bolded red EULA.

If you have two or more PCs connected in a network I cannot recommend the free version of AVG.

[Revtim]

That was useful Alereon, thanks. AVG found it as soon as I saved the file.

[ReBusEniGma]

I'm another AVG user. I have used the free version for years, but I have recently bought version 7.0 because it has many features that I was tired of being without that the free version doesn't have; namely, better scheduling and specifying which folders/files to scan and how often.

It's an excellent product and I fully recommend it.

[UselessGit]

I use F-prot and the ZoneAlarm firewall. I installed this after a week of horror a few months ago when I had to clean 7 computers here at work, one of them had 12 different viruses IIRC and they all had more than 3. After installing F-prot and ZoneAlarm I have been completely virus-free. All hail Fridrik Skulason and his awesome anti-virus software! I have to admit, though, that I bought F-prot mostly because it's an Icelandic product..

[amarone]

Another AVG here.

[Kal]

A British computer magazine recently tested a variety of anti-virus and anti-trojan programs, both commercial and freeware, using over 58,000 viruses and trojans.

The top 5 programs (and the overall detection rate) were:

F-Secure - 99.63%

Kaspersky - 99.35%

AntiVirenKit (AVK) - 98.67%

McAfee - 97.24%

RAV - 94.26%


The top free anti-virus programs were:

AntiVir - 77.74%

Fire Anti-virus Kit - 67.99%

AVG - 65.68%


One thing that was quite interesting is that, with only two exceptions, the anti-trojan programs tested detected less than 40% of the trojans and backdoors - most of the anti-virus programs* did better.

*Of the free programs only AntiVir managed this, detecting 49.21% of them.

[Kal]

Oh, to clarify something; the Fire Anti-virus Kit tested was the lite version.

Also, for the benefit of the OP; PC-Cillin had an overall detection rate of 86.94%

[Absolute]

I use NOD32 (www.nod32.com). Simple, lightweight, etc. Works great.

[Patr100]

Here is another free AV. AVAST 4Home
As far as I can see it's OK for perosnal use as long as it's non-profit. Nothing about networks as far as I can see on the site.
http://www.asw.cz/i_idt_226.html

[Mr. Blue Sky]

McAfee Virus Scan 8.0.

I've used McAfee since ver 5.0 and have been pleased with it's performance.

One big exception, may Og help you if you ever have to fully uninstall it. It's a serious bitch.

Thankfully, I've only had to do this twice (total system crashes not related to McAfee).

[Dragon Phoenix]

One more vore for AVG.

[Wesley Clark]

Norton antivirus, i got it on ebay for about $6.

[neoof]

Originally posted by Kal
A British computer magazine recently tested a variety of anti-virus and anti-trojan programs, both commercial and freeware, using over 58,000 viruses and trojans.

The top 5 programs (and the overall detection rate) were:

F-Secure - 99.63%

Kaspersky - 99.35%

AntiVirenKit (AVK) - 98.67%

McAfee - 97.24%

RAV - 94.26%


The top free anti-virus programs were:

AntiVir - 77.74%

Fire Anti-virus Kit - 67.99%

AVG - 65.68%


One thing that was quite interesting is that, with only two exceptions, the anti-trojan programs tested detected less than 40% of the trojans and backdoors - most of the anti-virus programs* did better.

*Of the free programs only AntiVir managed this, detecting 49.21% of them.

Thanks :)
What do u use?

[Revtim]

Originally posted by Mr. Blue Sky
McAfee Virus Scan 8.0.

I've used McAfee since ver 5.0 and have been pleased with it's performance.

One big exception, may Og help you if you ever have to fully uninstall it. It's a serious bitch.

Thankfully, I've only had to do this twice (total system crashes not related to McAfee). I feel your pain. Outlook on my computer still tries to load the damn McAfee plugin, even though it was uninstalled maybe years ago.

[Kal]

Originally posted by neoof
Thanks :)
What do u use?Shit, I did mean to say. I've used AVG for quite a while, but now I'm giving AntiVir a go.

[neoof]

Have any of u heard of bull guard? i had it installed on my last system (trial version) and it was quite good. It told u what was trying to access the internet or change ur registary and gave u an option on what to do.

Really easy to use and understand. Loads of options.

[Revtim]

Originally posted by Kal
I've used AVG for quite a while, but now I'm giving AntiVir a go. It crossed my mind to change to AntiVir from AVG after I read those test results you posted. Any comparisons between the two you can share, like ease-of-updating or CPU usage?

[Cardinal]

AVG Free Edition CAN NOT BE INSTALLED ON SERVERS FOR ANY REASON. IT CAN NOT BE INSTALLED IN ANY NETWORKED ENVIRONMENT!I have personall installed AVG onto a networked computer just fine, and it has found viruses for me on that comp.

I don't know that you can run the free version from a server to check all the clients, though. I think definitely not.

[Kal]

Originally posted by Revtim
Any comparisons between the two you can share, like ease-of-updating or CPU usage?Offhand, the two main differences I've noticed are that signature update downloads are larger with AntiVir and there's no option to create a bootdisk (not having a floppy drive on the computer it's installed on, that's not an issue).

[Chairman Pow]

Any reason not to use two in tandem? That is, running one full-time and turning off the option to have the other one running in the background, but giving it the occasoinal scan? I'm doing this right now with Pest Patrol and the free version of Adaware (running PP continuously and occasionally using AA, once every couple of days)? I understand that a virus might be a little more pressing than spyware though...

[neoof]

Shall I just get McAfree? It's hard to uninstall but if it works, why shud i want to, right? :confused:

[AHunter3]

I don't use anything.

[slortar]

I use Norton at work. At home I use common sense. :)

I've tried out McAfee before and found it to be decidedly inferior. My parents also tried using for a while and hated it. Of course, it might have improved in recent versions, so your mileage may vary--last I touched it was about 3 or 4 years ago.

[RealityChuck]

I use Trend Micro OfficeScan at work; it's by far the best for a managed environment.

At home, it's AVG. Can't beat the price (though you can tie it with Antivir, which seems to work fine, too).

[neoof]

Isn't antivir the one that cant be used in english?

[rjung]

I don't use anything.
Me neither. I find people who fuss and fret over firewalls and antivirus software amusing. :D

[LordVor]

Here's another vote for "the one between my ears".

-lv

[Carnac the Magnificent!]

Thanks :)
What do u use?

The research you cite--showing AVG as the worst performer--jibes with my long-term suspicions. After being burned a couple of times, I've been running McAfee and AVG (along with Zone Alarm) and thus ask: Why is it that when one of my anti-viral programs intercepts a virus, it's always McAfee that catches it, while good ol' free AVG sits there like a bump on a log? I'm talking every time. Fact is, I've never seen AVG spring into action and I keep it updated. (Why do I run it then? Scientific curiosity.)

Re: the notion of relying on what's located between one's ears as the best form of anti-virus, that suggestion doesn't jibe with reality, especially for those of us who heavily rely on the Internet for business.

I'm no fan of attachments, given the attendant risks, but I *have to* open them from time to time. It's a fact of business. Given the sophistication of the newer malware, the suggestion that you should "only rely on a trusted source" is meaningless. Whether you know who is sending you a virus has no bearing on whether they're innocuously forwarding you a killer virus.

Interesting how few people recommend Norton. SystemWorks 2003 may be the worst resources hog in history. Read the reviews on Amazon.com.

[amarinth]

Shall I just get McAfree? It's hard to uninstall but if it works, why shud i want to, right? :confused:Because it doesn't work very well.

I use Norton. It actually detects viruses (funny that).
I had McAfee for about 6 months. It slowed my computer to a halt, using up all resources (it was like having a virus anyway). Then it never detected a single virus, ever, and I get sent 2 or 3/day, sometimes more. Then I watched one horrible evening as my computer was obviously dying (from Klez as it turns out... I must have clicked something on accident) and McAfee told me that everything was virus free. Really it was! That was the end of that machine.

We also use it at work, it's just as ineffective there as it was at home.

Get anything else. Hiring a psychic to use positive energy to keep your machine virus free would work as well as McAfee - plus it would be far more entertaining.

[Carnac the Magnificent!]

[QUOTE=amarinth]Because it doesn't work very well ... It slowed my computer to a halt, using up all resources (it was like having a virus anyway). QUOTE]


PC Magazine vehemently disagrees, but then they're the same folks who 4-star-rated Norton, a product that many, many users rage against as a huge resources hog that slows PC's to a crawl. All of this points to the subjective experience of users re: malware protection. Go over to Amazon.com (or other sites) and you'll find dozens of users ranting about Norton. PC Magazine, meanwhile, rates both Norton and McAfee as top notch. (Guess who's buying lots of ad space?)

I had McAfee for 4 years. Over this period, the product went from poor to usually excellent. Of course, in this era of super-viruses, "usually" is a recipe for computing disaster. Suffice it to say: the state of the art lags behind the pimply-faced pukes who script this crap in their bedrooms.

I'll also add this: In most real-world applications (i.e., for those of us who *must* open attachments for work purposes), running a PC without anti-virus apps is crazy--and please, folks--don't counter with your anecdotal experiences. Ask any reputable computer pro, and they'll tell you that a PC without virus protection (or router) is just begging for trouble.

[Ice Wolf]

I've used Norton's, now I'm giving PC-cillin a try. I'm not an anti-virus/firewall fanatic -- but I do believe in insurance and backup in case the day comes when "what's between my ears" lets me down. Badly.

[peasea]

Also running AVG on a network, here. That is, I have two computers behind a router.
I just finished installing AVG at the suggestion today of a coworker (this thread had good timing), and am so happy, after having McAfee for over a year. McAfee hardly ever notified me of anything. Even worse, the few times it did, it said I had an infected boot record, but couldn't fix it! I just used XP restore manager about an hour ago to rewrite the boot record, then installed AVG. It found 361 infected files! I'm never going back to McAfee.

[rjung]

Re: the notion of relying on what's located between one's ears as the best form of anti-virus, that suggestion doesn't jibe with reality, especially for those of us who heavily rely on the Internet for business.
That's only if you work on the assumption that Windows is the only game in town.

[yosemite]

running a PC without anti-virus apps is crazy--and please, folks--don't counter with your anecdotal experiences. Ask any reputable computer pro, and they'll tell you that a PC without virus protection (or router) is just begging for trouble.Ooops!

I must be "begging for trouble," then, because I haven't used anti-virus on the computer I'm on right now for a looonnnng time. In fact, I can't remember when I last updated the virus software, and I have no immediate plans to do so.

:shrug:

[Czarcasm]

Ooops!

I must be "begging for trouble," then, because I haven't used anti-virus on the computer I'm on right now for a looonnnng time. In fact, I can't remember when I last updated the virus software, and I have no immediate plans to do so.

:shrug:
Slightly off topic, and not to attack or anything, but how can you be sure you are not passing viruses on to others, then?

[AHunter3]

Re: the notion of relying on what's located between one's ears as the best form of anti-virus, that suggestion doesn't jibe with reality, especially for those of us who heavily rely on the Internet for business.

I'm no fan of attachments, given the attendant risks, but I *have to* open them from time to time. It's a fact of business.

Would you purchase and install antivirus software written three years ago and expect it to offer you meaningful protection? I'm guessing no, right? -- because antivirus software doesn't do a very good job with viruses that came into being after the AV software was written.

Well, Macintosh antivirus software is, in its entirety, attempting to do that. The only protection it can offer the end user is to try to anticipate future viruses that it knows nothing about, and catch them if and when they make their appearance.

Because there are no existing ones.




Well, OK, some disclaimers do apply.

a) If a Mac user has the Classic environment, or is still using MacOS 9 or earlier, and opens an attachment that contains the AutoStart worm or one of the ancient 68K viruses that will actually run in anything newer than System 6, a virus infecton could actually result. None of these are "email viruses" of the sort that auto-propogate themselves by hijacking your email program or using an SMTP engine of their own. Except for AutoStart, they aren't very destructive (one of them will attempt to throw up a message that says "Don't Panic" at some point; one will attempt to change the name of your startup volume to "Trent Saburo" at some point; etc). But they do exist. So when I say I don't use anything, that applies to my MacOS X environment. My MacOS 9 environment is adequately protected with a combo of the decade-old Disinfectant extension for the ancient 68K buggies and the WormGuard extension that stops AutoStart.

b) If your email rules are set up so as to auto-forward email under some circumstances to some recipients without any interaction from you, you may be auto-forwarding email infected with PC viruses to PC users. The Mac antivirus software does try to catch and quarantine these and prevent you from passively spreading them in this fashion. I find it easier to have my rules refrain from auto-forwarding any emails, and if I needed to I would strip file attachments first, and if I couldn't do that I would queue but not send them until I'd had a chance to see what the attachments were.

[Carnac the Magnificent!]

Ooops!

I must be "begging for trouble," then, because I haven't used anti-virus on the computer I'm on right now for a looonnnng time. In fact, I can't remember when I last updated the virus software, and I have no immediate plans to do so.

:shrug:

Let me guess. You're a Mac or Linux user, correct? I rarely see such certitude in savvy Windows users. (And don't be so certain if you're on a Mac platform.) Run an updated antivirus app on your PC and you'd be surprised what turns up--and as Czarcasm says, what you might be spreading to others.

I stand by my observations--as do the overwhelming majority of computer science professionals today. Outside of a Linux environment, heavy PC users (i.e. lots of attachments and downloads) need antivirus protection. Sure Norton is a heinous systems hog and, yes, Norton and McAfee are far from perfect, but operating Windows butt naked in a hostile environment is like having unprotected sex at an NBA orgy.

[Chairman Pow]

Geez, you guys have me paranoid now. I've got the online Pest Patrol (run once every few days) and AVG going realtime and a full scan every couple of days. Should I add more? Others?

I gotta stop it with the ghost stories and Anti-Virus tales. Next thing will be spyware...

[Ximenean]

Let me guess. You're a Mac or Linux user, correct? I rarely see such certitude in savvy Windows users. (And don't be so certain if you're on a Mac platform.) Run an updated antivirus app on your PC and you'd be surprised what turns up--and as Czarcasm says, what you might be spreading to others.

I stand by my observations--as do the overwhelming majority of computer science professionals today. Outside of a Linux environment, heavy PC users (i.e. lots of attachments and downloads) need antivirus protection. Sure Norton is a heinous systems hog and, yes, Norton and McAfee are far from perfect, but operating Windows butt naked in a hostile environment is like having unprotected sex at an NBA orgy.
Perhaps in a business environment, but a properly configured Windows PC, operated by a not completely naive user, is pretty safe from viruses. Don't hide file extensions, disable some of the stupid Windows defaults such as running scripts by default, don't boot from untrusted disks, and you're pretty safe. I've been running a Windows PC for 12 years, no anti-virus software, firewall or anything, and I've never had a virus. I do keep a copy of AVG around, but I've never had occasion to use it.
When I worked as a PC support guy I did include Norton AV (ugh) in the standard build, because I couldn't trust the users not to open those intriguing looking executable attachments (mind you, Message Labs' e-mail scanning service helped a lot there), and because they liked having automated Word/Excel documents.