Which internet security suite do u use?

[c627627]

...the only reason I switched to and still stay with Avira Antivir freeware:

I actually kept the virii that Avira found and others missed on my personal system and then used them to test as many other anti virus programs as I could find to see if they could detect the nasties that found their way to my personal system which was an excellent benchmark for me.

Of course your system and files may be clean but as I recall, Avg's definitions were among the worst in comparison when tested by others...

 

[IAmMoen]

Such as? Could you refer me to something I could use that would find these hidden issues?

Chances are you have not necessarily run across something that malicious yet. But if you somehow think that it CANT happen then you should check where avg lies on a few reviews.

http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php

For example

It detects everything I throw at it, either accidentally or deliberately for 'testing' .

I have used the following free antivirus and each have failed me:
-AVG
-Avast
-Avira
-SpyBot (although it is more for malware, which does include trojans, etc.)
-Bit Defender FREE edition

Now, the list is organized because as you go down, each one has found more viruses than the one before it - at least through my experience in using them.

Case in point that there are a lot programs that let things through. And its not like they are categorized easily as either good or bad. Their abilities fall throughout the range from bad to good. If there was one that was perfect then I think we would all be saying the same one but there isn't.

I am just saying don't let a "perfect" setup lull you into complacency. If you click everything you can chances are you will eventually run across something that can make it through.

And if you want something to verify this with all the antivirus's on this page that are getting great reviews are a good place to start.

 

[SuperMiguel]

avast xD

 

[c627627]

Avast's definitions also didn't find the infections on my system and when tested against others, 2/3 of competing anti virus products had better definitions than Avast, so that's not good on those two counts.

 

[terran2k]

I use Kaspersky now, I got it for like $10 after rebates. I used to use Avira free edition before that.

 

[nd4spdbh2]

i use nothing... Firefox + watching what i download NO AV... never had n e probs, besides a flash drive that got infected on a school computer.

 

[c627627]

i use nothing... never had n e probs.

besides a flash drive that got infected on a school computer.

 

[Albert45]

I am using the comodo for the security of my pc and i set a password on my wifi to avoid the misuse of my network.Because a hacker can easily hack all devices that are connected with the network if he had any flaw in your network.

 

[neo668]

I've used Microsoft Security Essentials since it first came out and I've never had a problem all these years. I don't use anything else. It's light and free and quite unobtrusive. Just install and forget.

It works for me. Don't know about others.

 

[wagex]

i dont use any active av i do maybe a once every 6 month scan with trend micro housecall / malware bytes which theres never anything there for them to find, besides a couple suspicious cookies lol. im just careful about what i do.

 

[Mr.Guvernment]

ugh, really, this again, you can be careful all you want and i cant wait until a site you trust gets compromised, they do all the time and people like you then help spread the issue around for a few months until you scan and go OH! how did that get there!

with a rig like your running mse and malwarebytes would give 0 performance hit..

Better safe than sorry, AV is like insurance. you have it you dont use it, you dont have it, one day you wish you did!

 

[h4rm0ny]

I just use Windows Defender and the in-built firewall in Windows 8. I've found it effective so far. (touches wood frantically). I used the MS Security Essentials before that on Windows 7. And my other OS is Debian, so **** 'em.

I don't see a need for paying for this, though the last time I did (when someone asked me for one) I went with Bit Defender.

As for Norton, I once saw it pop-up one of those messages saying it had just defended me when I wasn't even connected to a network! Norton isn't good for anything other than slowing down all my other software, imo.

The only PC security software I despise more than Norton is McAffee and that's because that **** is installed on every laptop I ever wanted to buy and to get it off, I had to actually (I kid you not), spend about twenty minutes Googling around the Web until I found a well-hidden page on the McAffee site (how you actually get to it from within the McAffee site I have no idea), that let me download a program that you could run to let you uninstall it!

Only John MacAffee himself can truly express my feelings about McAffee software. (Note the below is actually him).

(NSFW for those that care)

 

[wagex]

ugh, really, this again, you can be careful all you want and i cant wait until a site you trust gets compromised, they do all the time and people like you then help spread the issue around for a few months until you scan and go OH! how did that get there!

with a rig like your running mse and malwarebytes would give 0 performance hit..

Better safe than sorry, AV is like insurance. you have it you dont use it, you dont have it, one day you wish you did!

yea really that again, if anything happens i have no personal data on the main drive, if anything were to happen i have it imaged on my server all i gotta do is pxe boot to clonezilla and reload the image, back to new in under 20 mins. i have only had that setup for a short period of time, since last time i installed windows about 6 months ago, but before that being careful always worked, never had anything worth mentioning besides like a said a few "suspicious cookies".

maybe my being careful and your being careful are two different things.

"people like you then help spread the issue around" is laughable.

 

[c627627]

maybe my being careful and your being careful are two different things.

"Customers who follow safe browsing best practices are not likely to be compromised by any exploitation of the WMF vulnerability. Users should take care not to visit unfamiliar or un-trusted Web sites that could potentially host the malicious code."
Microsoft Corporation
January 3, 2006

...Meanwhile, just 180 Days earlier:

 

[h4rm0ny]

"Customers who follow safe browsing best practices are not likely to be compromised by any exploitation of the WMF vulnerability. Users should take care not to visit unfamiliar or un-trusted Web sites that could potentially host the malicious code."
Microsoft Corporation
January 3, 2006

...Meanwhile, just 180 Days earlier:

Are you implying that microsoft.com isn't an untrusted site?

 

[wagex]

"Customers who follow safe browsing best practices are not likely to be compromised by any exploitation of the WMF vulnerability. Users should take care not to visit unfamiliar or un-trusted Web sites that could potentially host the malicious code."
Microsoft Corporation
January 3, 2006

...Meanwhile, just 180 Days earlier:

lol thats pretty good

 

[Mr.Guvernment]

How is it laughable, you do know most infection now lie dormant or do things you wont notice , not likle before where infections would delete files and make your system slow, they like to use your resources this day in age.

Fact is, one day you will get compromised with your "safe browsing" from a "safe" site.

Put it this way, i have MSE and malware bytes and i visit what ever sites i want with out worry of infection and so far i have not had a virus since i was 18 and a french hacker got into my computer. (i am now 33)

It isnt just about your data, it is about your computer possibly becoming a serving location to spread infection to others and be used in massive bot net attacks.