Replacing a security suite with free software?

Voidbringer · Apr 13, 2012

I'm trying to get Fairpoint's security suite to work for an old lady whose computer I'm working on. The issue is it keeps popping up a "encountered an unexpected error and must close" type of error where it doesn't log anything and never says what the error is. Trying to fix it is shooting in the dark but I'm giving it a go. Regardless, I'm wondering what the alternatives are for replacing an entire security suite that scans for viruses (plus trojans, spyware, all such) on her computer and in her email, has a firewall, prevents pop-ups, and blocks dangerous websites. The entire package of replacement software though would have to be lightweight because it's an old computer, windows xp with 512mb ram type old. It's alright if it consumes some cpu because she really isn't concerned with speed but I want to minimize the impact of it anyway.

Any ideas / any preferences for free security software out there?

Thanks for any ideas.

TollhouseFrank · Apr 13, 2012

for an all-in-one solution that's free?

http://www.zonealarm.com/

though for free, i'd usually just go with Microsoft Security Essentials, let it re-enable the windows firewall, and it is just set-and-forget. Very easy on system resources, NEVER bugs you about anything. It just works.

I.M.O.G. · Apr 13, 2012

I also vote for MSE. I don't think anyone can prove complete/superior enough coverage to warrant a cost on top of what you can get free.

Every current browser can block popus and warn/block dangerous sites. MSE should block/flag anytime a dangerous file attempts to execute, including if its opened from email.

Cojac92 · Apr 14, 2012

MSE seems to have pretty regular definition updates as well.

illli · Apr 14, 2012

yeah mse is pretty simple and easy to use. could probably 'set it and forget it'

Edward78 · Apr 14, 2012

TollhouseFrank said:
for an all-in-one solution that's free?

http://www.zonealarm.com/

though for free, i'd usually just go with Microsoft Security Essentials, let it re-enable the windows firewall, and it is just set-and-forget. Very easy on system resources, NEVER bugs you about anything. It just works.

ZA is just a FW, well they just offer the ZFW for free. So that for FW, Avast for AV & MSE for spyware.

Alexender Josep · Apr 17, 2012

I never depend on free security software. Most of these software don't provide any guarantee at all. I always buy a security software and then update it regularly. I think that is a more secure way to stay away from trouble. I would suggest Mcafee. It works best for me.

SteveLord · Apr 17, 2012

Alexender Josep said:
I never depend on free security software. Most of these software don't provide any guarantee at all. I always buy a security software and then update it regularly. I think that is a more secure way to stay away from trouble. I would suggest Mcafee. It works best for me.

How is paying for software automatically more secure?

Automata · Apr 17, 2012

SteveLord said:
How is paying for software automatically more secure?

Because corporations always look out for the consumer's best interest.

Wait, no, that isn't how that saying goes.

MattNo5ss · Apr 17, 2012

Microsoft Security Essentials and SpyBot are the free software I use on our work machines. The only non-free software we use is Malwarebytes.

On my personal PCs, I haven't used security software in years. Every now and then I'll install MSE/Spybot/Malwarebytes and run scans just to see, but they always come up empty.

McAfee would be last last thing I would use because I don't think the performance hit and cost are worth what the software provides.

EarthDog · Apr 17, 2012

MSE/Avira + Spybot + Malwarebytes FTW.

Mcafee is MEH at best at virus detection and is a resource hog (along with Symantec/Norton). Cant say I would pay for either of those products myself.

EDIT: I dont run any AV software though. But when I do, run what I listed above.

SteveLord · Apr 17, 2012

The corporate versions of McAfee and Symantec work well and aren't as resource intensive believe it or not. And having the support there is warranted without a doubt. Also, MSE limits you to 10 business machines. Otherwise, you have to drop cash for Forefront. :\

EarthDog · Apr 17, 2012

The viruses we have been inundated with must not have been on Symantec's list then...we have been decimated with viruses with that and are moving away from it. Mcafee was not on the short list either. +1 for support though dealing with Mcafee was a NIGHTMARE regarding response time. BUT this is regarding a personal computer not an enterprise environment.

MattNo5ss · Apr 17, 2012

We had the corporate version of Symantec here, and it would use 1/2 or more of available RAM for its real-time protection. So I dumped it and went with MSE/Spybot/Malwarebytes. All three of those combined use less resources than Symantec, but I only have MSE and Malwarebytes set for real-time protection...

EarthDog said:
MSE/Avira + Spybot + Malwarebytes FTW.

Mcafee is MEH at best at virus detection and is a resource hog (along with Symantec/Norton). Cant say I would pay for either of those products myself.

EDIT: I dont run any AV software though. But when I do, run what I listed above.

I HAD to post this when I saw your comment

GoD_tattoo · Apr 17, 2012

+1 to MSE and Malwarebytes. Both work fantastic. Especially Malwarebytes real time protection. We also dumped Symantec at work a few years ago. Will never use them again.

TollhouseFrank · Apr 21, 2012

GoD_tattoo said:
+1 to MSE and Malwarebytes. Both work fantastic. Especially Malwarebytes real time protection. We also dumped Symantec at work a few years ago. Will never use them again.

bad decision, then. Symantec about 3 years ago totally re-wrote everything. I refused to touch them till this year again, when it was rated at #1 by 2 different security services (that I trust that usually have Avira up at the top).

MSE consistantly only gets about an 85% or so detection rate. But a lot of people (myself included) like it just because it 'works' and doesn't bug you about anything.

The new stuff from norton this year? Uses less RAM than MSE, and has a near 99% detection rate. It actually works good. Symantec saw they were losing customers because of how bloated and slow their software got and they re-wrote it. Normally I would't plug for any pay-for-security software, but the new NIS from Symantec uses just 2 processes for 5,052k and 8,560k RAM each on my system, runs blazing fast, 0 effect on boot/gaming/networking, and with the top notch ratings it got from http://www.av-test.org/index.php?L=1 and http://www.av-test.org/index.php?L=1 , i decided to give it a whirl. It was well worth the money spent, i.m.o.

MSE used upwards of 128-256Mb all the time. Sure, I don't notice it with a 16gb system, but for bragging rights, it helps.

Oroka Sempai · Apr 22, 2012

No AV is perfect. When you have a 15yo who thinks his computer is a game console that also uses facebook, and every popup is yesyesesnextyesyesyesokayyesreboot, you are doomed whether you paid for your AV or not.

Computer protection is 50% software and 50% education.

MSE is perfect for pretty much every user. IMO it should be part of Windows, roll MSE and the firewall into a network security suite that also monitors bandwidth, traffic, and parental controls. It should have a desktop app (or whatever they call it) in Win8 that shows network stats, last scan time, last update... Im sure the AV companies will **** a brick, but an OS should be able to defend itself.

I wouldnt run any AV it if wasnt for the fact that I have other people using my system.

G33K454URU5 R3X · Apr 22, 2012

Not that MSE is a real memory hog, but I would be concerned with any modern day AV consuming a decent amount of RAM; 4GB DDR3 is the 'norm' now, and the machine is running 512MB DDR. I'd at least double it to 1GB DDR.

SteveLord · Apr 23, 2012

Oroka Sempai said:
MSE is perfect for pretty much every user. IMO it should be part of Windows,

Unfortunately, Microsoft can't legally include it automatically. Otherwise the AV industry would sue. :\

Realee · Apr 23, 2012

SteveLord said:
Unfortunately, Microsoft can't legally include it automatically. Otherwise the AV industry would sue. :\

Which is just crap =/
They're not legally allowed to provide their own software with... their own software? Can't believe this was found to be anti-competitive during the browser wars last year.

Replacing a security suite with free software?

Registered

Senior Headphone Guru

Glorious Leader

Member

Member

Member

New Member

Member

Destroyer of Empires and Use

5up3r m0d3r4t0r

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Member

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

5up3r m0d3r4t0r

Member

Senior Headphone Guru

Member

Member

Member

loss.jpg

Similar threads