Battle NortonDNS or Bitdefender TrafficLight ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 2913
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 2913

Thread author
I am running Fsecure AV on Win 7 64.
Fsecure AV dont have Webshield.

I am little confused with NortonDNS & Bitdefender TrafficLight.
Which one is better & you suggest for malware/phishing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Logethica, Kent and Piteko21
Sort by date Sort by votes
Actually this now varies as detection capabilities but in such widely view Bitdefender Trafficlight should be enough supplement to your needs but if you want more flexible configuration then Norton DNS.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bitdefender is much better for me, as it uses the same engine as comercial Bitdefender, as for Norton emmm once a while you will see something blocked from them... however you may use both as Bitdefender is a plugin and Norton is a DNS service which you can implement it via your Router and also offers you some interesting features

PST: As they say, Norton DNS is just a basic layer of protection..
 
  • Like
Reactions: frogboy
Upvote 0 Downvote
I do not think Bitdefender trafficlight is a good opinion.
It does not allow the users to permanently exclude a URL from detection.
So if a website is detected as malicious due to a false positive error, then you must deal with an alert page each time you visit this website.
I should say that it is boring.

I have submitted those false positive errors to bitdefender, but no response after several weeks:(.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Koroke San
Upvote 0 Downvote
Online_Sword said:
I do not think Bitdefender trafficlight is a good opinion.
It does not allow the users to permanently exclude a URL from detection.
So if a website is detected as malicious due to a false positive error, then you must deal with an alert page each time you visit this website.
I should say that it is boring.

I have submitted those false positive errors to bitdefender, but no response after several weeks:(.
Click to expand...

Bitdefender traffic light is a plugin therefore it only makes basic URL scan which means that it only compares URL while surfing in fact i think that none of any existing plugin (AV scanner) would allow you to exclude urls
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
gricardo21 said:
Bitdefender traffic light is a plugin therefore it only makes basic URL scan which means that it only compares URL while surfing in fact i think that none of any existing plugin (AV scanner) would allow you to exclude urls
Click to expand...

NONE?:rolleyes:
Maybe you can try McAfee Siteadivsor.
It is also an independent browser plugin, but allows the exclusion of urls.

There are so many plugins that are designed to block malicious urls, but I have only tried about 3-4 of them.
So I believe there still exists some other security plugins with the capability of exclusion.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
  • Like
Reactions: Logethica and Koroke San
Upvote 0 Downvote
Online_Sword said:
NONE?:rolleyes:
Maybe you can try McAfee Siteadivsor.
It is also an independent browser plugin, but allows the exclusion of urls.

There are so many plugins that are designed to block malicious urls, but I have only tried about 3-4 of them.
So I believe there still exists some other security plugins with the capability of exclusion.
Click to expand...
you got a point, however McAfee site advisor comes with an installer (you can also get it as a plugin), back to the topic none of the URL filters that are plugins would allow you to exclude url or offer you advanced features. As for McAfee since it is a program that monitor the entire HTTP is more that obvious that it would allow you to do "much more"
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Malicious/Phishing protection in adblockers like adblockplus, adguard, etc... are not that good, right?

Browser protection for mal/phishing are good enough with excellent AV like Fsecure AV (currently running) for average users?
Browsers IE & Chrome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Logethica
Upvote 0 Downvote
  • Like
Reactions: Koroke San
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

You may also like...