Battle Bitdefender Internet Security 2015 vs Kaspersky Internet Security 2016

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lukajlo

Lukajlo

Level 2
Thread author
Verified
Mar 20, 2011
141
54
64
I want to buy KIS 16 key but I still have BitDefender. Whats you experience with those two Anitivirus?
1 more question, if someone knows, can I activate KIS 16 with KIS 15 unactivated key?
Thanks everyone, this is very important to me
 
  • Like
Reactions: done
Sort by date Sort by votes
Tony Cole said:
What was 23rd? It was officially released today "Patch a has been officially released. Don't forget to restart your system after updating." 23rd was when the beta version was released for testing.
Click to expand...

In your link:


Patch A for Kaspersky Internet Security 2016 has been released on 30 July, 2015.

Patch A is installed automatically with databases updates of Kaspersky Internet Security 2016 version 16.0.0.614 and fixes the following:

  • Some interface issues.
  • Some Secure Data Input issues
To install Patch A:

  1. Run the update for Kaspersky Internet Security 2016.
  2. When the update is completed, restart your computer.
  3. Upon restart, open Kaspersky Internet Security 2016.
  4. In the lower part of the window, click the Support link.
  5. If the patch has been installed successfully, the letter a will be added to the product version number.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Enju
Upvote 0 Downvote
Moose said:
> Which one can you use with Sandboxie?
> Which one will micro/macro viruses?
> Which one stop scripts?
> Which one stop worms?

Something to think about!;)
Click to expand...

For Sandboxie seems that question is already answered with the link you posted on a thread in Avira. ;)

forums.sandboxie.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=21539

The other questions may surely answer by @cruelsister since she test those scripts and other mitigations which most AV's fail to protect under those circumstances. ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Does this patch fix the issues with Windows 10, or is it just the same - kind of odd, I cannot find anything of substance on their forums, only that MR1 is soon to start the beta phase. Does that mean Kaspersky users running Windows 10 will have to await that release before adequate protection is offered?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BitDefender for sure because KIS is known to be a ram hog and their scans take forever to scan 60 files that are under 20 MBs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rupeshjoshi62 said:
That's true but even on Bitdefender's Official Site in the system requirements Windows 10 is included.
Click to expand...
Just because they say it runs, doesn't mean it is optimized... IDS isn't working on x64 with BD 2015, there is no AMSI support too...

Tony Cole said:
Does this patch fix the issues with Windows 10, or is it just the same - kind of odd, I cannot find anything of substance on their forums, only that MR1 is soon to start the beta phase. Does that mean Kaspersky users running Windows 10 will have to await that release before adequate protection is offered?
Click to expand...
Protection is working fine, the only things not really working are the custom application rules (which are not needed in 99,99%) and the interface self protection, RAM cleanup and rollback don't really matter since an infected machine has to be formated anyways.
However MR1 should fix those issues. :)

nsm0220 said:
BitDefender for sure because KIS is known to be a ram hog and their scans take forever to scan 60 files that are under 20 MBs.
Click to expand...
"RAM hog" RAM is there to be used, Bitdefender for example uses over 250MB on a 16GB machine, KIS under 95. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: frogboy, Nightwalker and Microlab
Upvote 0 Downvote
Enju said:
Just because they say it runs, doesn't mean it is optimized... IDS isn't working on x64 with BD 2015, there is no AMSI support too...
Click to expand...

Every, and I mean EVERY AV tests says that they are very very close, on some of tests BiDefender is better on some Kaspersky but the difference is very small and you sound like KIS is waaaay better. Please think twice before you post next time. ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Lukajlo said:
Every, and I mean EVERY AV tests says that they are very very close, on some of tests BiDefender is better on some Kaspersky but the difference is very small and you sound like KIS is waaaay better. Please think twice before you post next time. ;)
Click to expand...
Did I state otherwise? Please read and understand first, then reply! :rolleyes:
I said BD doesn't have IDS on 64bit and no AMSI support, not that it has better or worse protection than Kaspersky...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Azure, Tony Cole and Nightwalker
Upvote 0 Downvote
I dont know why they have such problems, I dont have it, I run Win 10 x64 and everything is ok, maybe they fix that so I think that limitation is for some users only
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Lukajlo said:
I dont know why they have such problems, I dont have it, I run Win 10 x64 and everything is ok, maybe they fix that so I think that limitation is for some users only
Click to expand...
No, Patchguard prohibits software from patching the kernel on x64 so it applies to every x64 user. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tony Cole
Upvote 0 Downvote
I was going to say, I truly believe Kaspersky wouldn't fix such limitations on a few systems, and leave the rest as they currently stand. I am mad; as the tech support guy said this patch would fix all the limitation issues.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Lukajlo said:
I am not sure about it because Intrusion Detection System is on Medium since I instal BD (Its on Permissive by default)
Click to expand...
I will repeat myself one last time for you: It's there but it is extremely limited on x64 to the point of being literally useless, you can crank it up to max settings and you won't get any popups while on x86 you will... (with exactly the same testfile), this is because of Patchguard on x64 which (theoretically) prevents the patching and/or hooking of the Windows kernel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tony Cole, Azure, XhenEd and 1 other person
Upvote 0 Downvote
@Enju is right that all AVs face severe constraints on x64 machines due to patch guard. Some AVs reveal the limitations, some don't. It would appear that all settings work, yes, but under the hood there are differences.

Fixing such limitations is extremely hard btw. The current approach taken by most AVs I monitor seem to be the use of hypervisors. For instance, Kaspersky uses a hypervisor module to block webcam captures and filter syscalls on x64 machines. However, not all machines have hardware virtualisation support, thus, some would not be able to enjoy this hypervisor protection. It would be irresponsible for vendors to report that these limitations are "solved" by hypervisors as some people are not able to enjoy its benefits. Also, hypervisor support is extremely hard as you would have to use different routines for AMD and Intel systems etc. while trying to make sure there are no incompatibilities and BSODs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nightwalker, XhenEd and Enju
Upvote 0 Downvote
Enju said:
I will repeat myself one last time for you: It's there but it is extremely limited on x64 to the point of being literally useless, you can crank it up to max settings and you won't get any popups while on x86 you will... (with exactly the same testfile), this is because of Patchguard on x64 which (theoretically) prevents the patching and/or hooking of the Windows kernel.
Click to expand...
So what you want to say that I am almost unprotected now?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

You may also like...