Battle Avast internet security 2014 vs Norton Security 2015

[wisd0m]

I need a light but efficient antivirus software

At the moment i have avast free installed and it's not bad

 

[Van2r]

For better protection you must combine avast! free with comodo firewall.
or at least use Avast! internet security that have a community firewall and control over all sort of things.
i think avast is lighter ram usage and cpu usage of both show it too. also False Positive are lower than Norton and many other things.

 

[Nico@FMA]

For better protection you must combine avast! free with comodo firewall.
or at least use Avast! internet security that have a community firewall and control over all sort of things.
i think avast is lighter ram usage and cpu usage of both show it too. also False Positive are lower than Norton and many other things.

Thats based on what? First of all the system resources used by Norton these days are one of the lowest around, and currently Avast IS uses more system resources.
In regards to detections, removal and protection Norton has a clear edge over Avast IS.
However in the defense of Avast, this is not due to the lack of protection but more because Norton IS is a very fine tuned package that has matured over many years.
In regards to FP in the many online tests Norton has shown to be VERY accurate.
Last thing i am going to say is that Comodo is not as good anymore as it use to be, and compared to Norton IS it might offer a better protection if tweaked, but Norton on the other hand does offer a really good smart firewall that does not need much tweaking and does provide way enough protection for the average user.

That said i applaud Avast for bringing a IS product as they are a very welcome addition.
Anyway before you make statements or give advise please educate yourself about the products mentioned as the comment you made is baseless.

On a final note both products are great and it really does not matter if you choose Avast IS or Norton IS as its just based upon preference and not protection wise.
Both have a proven record to be great at protection.

Cheers

 

[Ink]

It would be hard to choose which product, but once you know what you're looking for and how you use Security products, then the decision is easy.

Avast Internet Security comes with the additional Sandbox for on-demand use and SafeZone for a screen/key-logger free environment. Anti-Spam, but no use if you use webmail (ie. gmail, outlook.com) and a Firewall which can be configured. (A custom installation and you can choose what you want).

Norton Security 2015 is a new product line to replace Norton Antivirus, Internet Security and N360. With the optional version with Backup, the default package performs great as an all-round product.

I would go for Norton Security 2015. -- Why? Because you can install and forget, the Behavioral Blocker; SONAR has proven to be effective in the past and it's something I would trust* more than avast!'s database when it comes to File Reputation.

Other issues with avast! below:

1. http://malwaretips.com/threads/avas...s-softonic-partnership-and-free-adware.27402/
2. http://malwaretips.com/threads/avast-online-installer-offers-dropbox-software.33315/
3. http://malwaretips.com/threads/avast-file-reputation-flagging-windows-update.31294/

Bottom Line: I have voted Norton Security 2015.

My vote is NOT based on Detection Rates or Certifications by Testing Sites or any Youtube Reviews.

 

[Nico@FMA]

It would be hard to choose which product, but once you know what you're looking for and how you use Security products, then the decision is easy.

Avast Internet Security comes with the additional Sandbox for on-demand use and SafeZone for a screen/key-logger free environment. Anti-Spam, but no use if you use webmail (ie. gmail, outlook.com) and a Firewall which can be configured. (A custom installation and you can choose what you want).

Norton Security 2015 is a new product line to replace Norton Antivirus, Internet Security and N360. With the optional version with Backup, the default package performs great as an all-round product.

I would go for Norton Security 2015. -- Why? Because you can install and forget, the Behavioral Blocker; SONAR has proven to be effective in the past and it's something I would trust* more than avast!'s database when it comes to File Reputation.

Other issues with avast! below:

1. http://malwaretips.com/threads/avas...s-softonic-partnership-and-free-adware.27402/
2. http://malwaretips.com/threads/avast-online-installer-offers-dropbox-software.33315/
3. http://malwaretips.com/threads/avast-file-reputation-flagging-windows-update.31294/

Bottom Line: I have voted Norton Security 2015.

My vote is NOT based on Detection Rates or Certifications by Testing Sites or any Youtube Reviews.

very well said m8

 

[Razor555]

Personally i would use none of those two but that's just me.
Norton can really miss a few things and certainly don't really trust their file reputation system.

 

[Nico@FMA]

Personally i would use none of those two but that's just me.
Norton can really miss a few things and certainly don't really trust their file reputation system.

Why do you not trust their file reputation system? Keep in mind its one of the most comprehensive rep systems around with a proven record.
So i am thrilled to hear your opinion about it.

 

[Razor555]

Why do you not trust their file reputation system? Keep in mind its one of the most comprehensive rep systems around with a proven record.
So i am thrilled to hear your opinion about it.

Have used Norton internet security in the past and their reputation system is purely based on what the users say about it. Loads of those files, exe, dll... have very few users that actually use them. For me their rep system is meh, and i cant trust it.

 

[Nico@FMA]

Have used Norton internet security in the past and their reputation system is purely based on what the users say about it. Loads of those files, exe, dll... have very few users that actually use them. For me their rep system is meh, and i cant trust it.

Well there are 2 options either Symantec trusted or Community trusted.
Sym trust is nearly flawless but yes the Community trust has issues like any other Community trust rep system.

 

[Razor555]

Well there are 2 options either Symantec trusted or Community trusted.
Sym trust is nearly flawless but yes the Community trust has issues like any other Community trust rep system.

Well my point is that the community rep system is not very active and until all those files gets checked by Symantec, you might be already infected .

 

[wisd0m]

thank you all for your time and information

 

[Tony Cole]

Hi Everyone

I have not used Norton for 3-4yrs, but have started using their new 2015 version and I am really liking it. The GUI, system performance and expert setting(s) really make it a very good security suite. But, as said, both are very good in-terms-of protection very good (especially avast! hard mode).

Tony

 

[Nico@FMA]

Well my point is that the community rep system is not very active and until all those files gets checked by Symantec, you might be already infected .

Naaah you are wrong.
And while this copy past comes directly from their webpage and could be considered sales talk, a quick google search proves its not just marketing talks.
If you claim that Symantec/Norton community is not very active, then all others on the planet are death.

Symantec Insight Fulfills the Promise of Reputation
Some vendors do little more than post malware signatures to the Internet, tack on a white list, and call the result a reputation system. This approach might provide faster access to virus signatures but it is still reacting to known threats rather than identifying new ones.

Other companies take the next step and rate the reputation of the source of files. Though a step in the right direction, this is still not true context-aware security. Knowing the source of a file is useful – but it does not tell you if the file was newly created just to infect you.

Symantec Insight can identify how common or rare a file is, how old it is, its security rating, and how it might be associated with malware. Through context, Insight can identify new or rapidly mutating threats as well as rare but tightly targeted attacks.

To Define Context, the Size of Your Network Matters
Built on contributions from over 210 million systems and the Symantec Global Intelligence Network that spans 240,000 sensors in over 200 countries, Insight provides the context for understanding the risk of almost every file you’ll ever encounter.

Scale is necessary to answer critical questions such as:

• How many copies of this file exist globally?
• Is this file associated with infections or infectious behavior?
• How new is this file?
• Is the source of the file associated with infections?

Our technology not only promises security reputation, Symantec Insight proves it.

Source: http://www.symantec.com/reputation-based-security

File insight and Community & Symantec Reputation system has never been made to block or protect you.
It has been made to inform you about the file you are about to download & run.
And while it can clearly detect malicious files and remove & block them it does have FP's.
But in a world with constant new malware being uploaded to the WWW a reputation system like the one Symantec did setup years ago is probably more valuable then your antivirus package itself, for the plain and simple reason it can help you identifying malicious files before anyone within the AV industry has made a fix for it. And while this system has a proven record it does have some FP draw backs.
And this is not unique to Norton, every single AV brand in the world that uses "cloud and Reputation" based protection will have issues like mentioned above.
The difference is that Norton happens to be the biggest one around and has a proven record that leaves other eating dust when it comes to accuracy and such. (Damn i sound like a Norton sales man....)
But in all seriousness any reputation system is flawed to a point, yet every day vendors improve their system to provide better services, and keeping in mind the staggering amount of data processed this is not a easy task.
So before you say something you might wanna consider the facts i mentioned before passing judgment. That being said the moment a file hits a Norton node it will be classified instantly and rated. It takes less then a second. And while the REP system is checking your file it will prompt you if YOU want to allow the file, and it will give you a recommendation.
So if YOU choose to accept the file then YOU are responsible for the infection and not the REP system.
See my point?

Cheers

 

[Tony Cole]

Hi n.nvt

So, if I download software; Norton will ask me whether I wish to install it?

Tony

 

[Nico@FMA]

Hi n.nvt

So, if I download software; Norton will ask me whether I wish to install it?

Tony

Well if File Insight is active (Not sure if its active by default and if alert prompt is activated you need to check that) and configured it will tell you with each download if the file is safe to do so.
So thats a YES and NO.
Because some files are so new that Norton does not have info on them, to counter this you can allow the file and Norton will tag it internally and keep monitoring that particular file to a point where it can make a final call about the file its actions and reputation.
So if the file suddenly acts funny then Download insight will still activate the AV engine and remove the file on the spot.

For more understanding read this:
http://www.symantec.com/page.jsp?id=star&tab=secTab5

That being said its a double edged sword...

 

[Razor555]

Naaah you are wrong.
And while this copy past comes directly from their webpage and could be considered sales talk, a quick google search proves its not just marketing talks.
If you claim that Symantec/Norton community is not very active, then all others on the planet are death.

Symantec Insight Fulfills the Promise of Reputation
Some vendors do little more than post malware signatures to the Internet, tack on a white list, and call the result a reputation system. This approach might provide faster access to virus signatures but it is still reacting to known threats rather than identifying new ones.

Other companies take the next step and rate the reputation of the source of files. Though a step in the right direction, this is still not true context-aware security. Knowing the source of a file is useful – but it does not tell you if the file was newly created just to infect you.

Symantec Insight can identify how common or rare a file is, how old it is, its security rating, and how it might be associated with malware. Through context, Insight can identify new or rapidly mutating threats as well as rare but tightly targeted attacks.

To Define Context, the Size of Your Network Matters
Built on contributions from over 210 million systems and the Symantec Global Intelligence Network that spans 240,000 sensors in over 200 countries, Insight provides the context for understanding the risk of almost every file you’ll ever encounter.

Scale is necessary to answer critical questions such as:

• How many copies of this file exist globally?
• Is this file associated with infections or infectious behavior?
• How new is this file?
• Is the source of the file associated with infections?

Our technology not only promises security reputation, Symantec Insight proves it.

Source: http://www.symantec.com/reputation-based-security

File insight and Community & Symantec Reputation system has never been made to block or protect you.
It has been made to inform you about the file you are about to download & run.
And while it can clearly detect malicious files and remove & block them it does have FP's.
But in a world with constant new malware being uploaded to the WWW a reputation system like the one Symantec did setup years ago is probably more valuable then your antivirus package itself, for the plain and simple reason it can help you identifying malicious files before anyone within the AV industry has made a fix for it. And while this system has a proven record it does have some FP draw backs.
And this is not unique to Norton, every single AV brand in the world that uses "cloud and Reputation" based protection will have issues like mentioned above.
The difference is that Norton happens to be the biggest one around and has a proven record that leaves other eating dust when it comes to accuracy and such. (Damn i sound like a Norton sales man....)
But in all seriousness any reputation system is flawed to a point, yet every day vendors improve their system to provide better services, and keeping in mind the staggering amount of data processed this is not a easy task.
So before you say something you might wanna consider the facts i mentioned before passing judgment. That being said the moment a file hits a Norton node it will be classified instantly and rated. It takes less then a second. And while the REP system is checking your file it will prompt you if YOU want to allow the file, and it will give you a recommendation.
So if YOU choose to accept the file then YOU are responsible for the infection and not the REP system.
See my point?

Cheers

Thanks for the Symantec PR paste. Right so just let all those inexperienced users screw up their system anyway. Many of them just prefer not to make that choice and let the security solution do that for them automatically.

 

[Van2r]

Thats based on what? First of all the system resources used by Norton these days are one of the lowest around, and currently Avast IS uses more system resources.
In regards to detections, removal and protection Norton has a clear edge over Avast IS.
However in the defense of Avast, this is not due to the lack of protection but more because Norton IS is a very fine tuned package that has matured over many years.
In regards to FP in the many online tests Norton has shown to be VERY accurate.
Last thing i am going to say is that Comodo is not as good anymore as it use to be, and compared to Norton IS it might offer a better protection if tweaked, but Norton on the other hand does offer a really good smart firewall that does not need much tweaking and does provide way enough protection for the average user.

That said i applaud Avast for bringing a IS product as they are a very welcome addition.
Anyway before you make statements or give advise please educate yourself about the products mentioned as the comment you made is baseless.

On a final note both products are great and it really does not matter if you choose Avast IS or Norton IS as its just based upon preference and not protection wise.
Both have a proven record to be great at protection.

Cheers

oh i don't care about online test if you mean from that sponsered sites.
what is really better if you give a try to both of them.
as ram usage and cpu one of members lately reviewd norton is 2015 100mg of ram compare to below 50mb ram usage of avast!
and also when it become to cleaning or running suspecious items you can see how avast! is flexible i don't say norton isn't but when it come to find a soulotion and a light based av program it mean we must think the + point which antivirus do at both perfromance and protection.
idk about your exprience but as a normal knowledge of pc security i think norton is not suitable for users with frequent use from internet also false positive is outrated i downloaded many Programs near 4 5gb and norton sonar and download protection deleted them without my decide to doing it or not and i have limited usage for my internet traffic and couldn't give all my time to configuring a program which I needed for being light and protect well! it only just harrased me and wasted my money.
about firewall also It somehow could be for configurations avast have internet lock options and not need to manualy get off from net if you feel danger or attacks etc... also easy ways to rule for inbound and outbound going connections.
i think the only notice on performance impact could be at startup with avast.
but as i said in this post this is my exp of very high rate FP of norton and performance of both on a
64bit windows 7 os and 4gb ram and a pentium dual core pc anyway if you want to test anything in a wide chance of nothing get wrong we must spend a lot of time on it and having more systems!
also i commend you to watch one of Malware Security user review of norton 2014 is it could help somehow.
goodnight

 

[Nico@FMA]

Thanks for the Symantec PR paste. Right so just let all those inexperienced users screw up their system anyway. Many of them just prefer not to make that choice and let the security solution do that for them automatically.

Look m8 don't get hostile here
We have hijacked this topic long enough, i tried to explain you how things work while providing you with facts and first hand info.
Now if you like to keep your opinion then this is fine, but do not advise users just based upon your feelings.
Discussion is good and i agree that not everything Norton creates is as good as pictured because there is a lot to say about their services just like any other brand has their demons.
However just call me one reputation system that does things automatically and does it as well as Norton does? Do not even bother to reply to this as the facts are there.
Obviously there are other reputation based systems out there and some of them are pretty good, but yet they all have the same problems in common as Norton has.

All those inexperienced users should just follow the advise given by their protection as while it sometimes react over protective it is still a better choice then just clicking based upon "whatever"
Keep in mind a alert generated by any program is there for a reason so if you do not have experience to make a educated call about a particular alert then you might as well go with the recommendation given by the alert.
Call it better save then sorry and it works far better then clicking for the sake of clicking.
And thats the real issue with most users, they do not read and do not understand if they read, if people would just follow the advise given then the amount of malware infections that are being posted in the malware removal section would significantly drop.
Ask the staff here how many people do have kick ass protection yet they get infected by the most silly infection possible.
Its just a matter of not following advise given.

So the golden question is: Is this really the fault of Norton? Or any brand for that matter?

 

[Nico@FMA]

oh i don't care about online test if you mean from that sponsered sites.
what is really better if you give a try to both of them.
as ram usage and cpu one of members lately reviewd norton is 2015 100mg of ram compare to below 50mb ram usage of avast!
and also when it become to cleaning or running suspecious items you can see how avast! is flexible i don't say norton isn't but when it come to find a soulotion and a light based av program it mean we must think the + point which antivirus do at both perfromance and protection.
idk about your exprience but as a normal knowledge of pc security i think norton is not suitable for users with frequent use from internet also false positive is outrated i downloaded many Programs near 4 5gb and norton sonar and download protection deleted them without my decide to doing it or not and i have limited usage for my internet traffic and couldn't give all my time to configuring a program which I needed for being light and protect well! it only just harrased me and wasted my money.
about firewall also It somehow could be for configurations avast have internet lock options and not need to manualy get off from net if you feel danger or attacks etc... also easy ways to rule for inbound and outbound going connections.
i think the only notice on performance impact could be at startup with avast.
but as i said in this post this is my exp of very high rate FP of norton and performance of both on a
64bit windows 7 os and 4gb ram and a pentium dual core pc anyway if you want to test anything in a wide chance of nothing get wrong we must spend a lot of time on it and having more systems!
also i commend you to watch one of Malware Security user review of norton 2014 is it could help somehow.
goodnight

Rubbish m8.
Hmm maybe you do not know but i am a long time Symantec user and specialist. (Both professional and private)
Ask anyone here about me knowing how Norton & Symantec works. (Some even class me as a fanboy & sales man fact is i hate Norton with a passion it just happens that Professionally i got stuck with them and was forced to learn everything about them there is to learn and as such i came to respect them for what they really provide)
Anyway you will be hard pressed to find anyone on MT that knows as much about Norton & Symantec as i do. So not trying to be cocky here but you might wanna listen to what i have to say as i could teach you a thing or two.
@Umbra Polaris @Huracan @BoraMurdar @Littlebits (can you please validate what i just said.)

 

[FleischmannTV]

Do you mean hate or hated?