No it ain't IMO, but many also know it lacks official testing and that always been it's Achilles heel. Why I personal can say it ain't bad is because it's security layers saved my ass several times when I haven't used my VPN but, with that turned on, Thor never been more than a update patching software. A very effective one though and more than enough for me as I never needed a software that can update more that's already installed.Is Thor really bad?
Thor Premium is really good IMO and also one of the lightest solutions you can deploy. It has nice heuristics and BB, as well as sandboxing along with Avira signatures. They stack it with excellent DNS, Web, and process injection protection aspects of normal Heimdal. One of my strongest and lightest setup recommendations is Thor Premium combined with VS or OSArmor, with a near zero impact on system operation and gaming.Is Thor really bad? I know why everyone hates Webroot and they deserve it but I don't know much about Thor. I heard Thor uses Avira's engine so at least signature wise it's gotta be better than Webroot