Umbra

Level 14
Verified
doesn't need to be a small one It could be a big one as well, it could be payload + movie. Containerisation is one of the most effective ways to isolate potentially dangerous processed, including exploited ones. Opening non-trusted files in a container is exactly avoiding doing something stupid
No, full deny is the only real mechanism, sandbox aren't fully safe as before.

With all respect, the stupid is exactly what you are saying, running non-trusted files on your production machine hoping your sandbox/VM will keep you safe, which isn't so true since few years.

Don't get me wrong, I also do things I shouldn't, like downloading torrents, but I run them on a spare Linux machine, this is a real safe container, because I don't care of it being infected, /format Lol.
 
Last edited:

Burrito

Level 21
Verified
Currently usiings Malwarebytes Premium their claim antivirus is not needed they have it covered will report back on this issue
You're looking for trouble.

Malwarebytes is very weak.

Look at all the last tests of the professional testers.

Look at the Hub today.

I use Malwarebytes and hope for the best with them... but I have to acknowledge... they are pretty sucky.
 

zzz00m

Level 5
Stop with this. It's so misguiding question from all security perspectives to new users, what difference does it make comparing Antivirus suites? None is first and none is last, all are more or less equal default-allow.
OK. And your credentials as a security expert are ... ?

That is not very friendly to dismiss everyone that has tried to contribute to a friendly discussion here... ;)
 

Umbra

Level 14
Verified
OK. And your credentials as a security expert are ... ?
That is not very friendly to dismiss everyone that has tried to contribute to a friendly discussion here... ;)
But he is somehow right, he doesn't need to be an expert. In real life most AV/suites behave the same, detect > alert or block/quarantine.

All those test aren't really worthy, a risky user will encounter, what ? 3 malware a month, a normal one maybe one a year...me? none in 20+ years, i had to go to malware referencing site to find some to play with...LOL.

The real difference is how the user respond. I can use the worst AV ever made, i will be safer than a happy clicker with the self-claimed "best" AV.

Also, you can't compare what isn't comparable, to be comparable properly, the products must have the same features and be used the same way, which is hardly the case now.

So yes he is right, if i was a noob coming on this thread, i will probably will be misguided by emotionally-guided opinions.
The only thing you can be sure is the AV's reliability not efficiency (which varies depending of the context).

so "best, powerful, strongest, blablabla" aren't the right terms to use, "reliable" is.
 
Last edited:

blackice

Level 13
Verified
You're looking for trouble.

Malwarebytes is very weak.

Look at all the last tests of the professional testers.

Look at the Hub today.

I use Malwarebytes and hope for the best with them... but I have to acknowledge... they are pretty sucky.
Actually they turned out better than I expected. 14/19 zero day isn’t bad. Better than before at least, but not something I’d use as my main line of defense.
 

artek

Level 4
No, full deny is the only real mechanism, sandbox aren't fully safe as before.

With all respect, the stupid is exactly what you are saying, running non-trusted files on your production machine hoping your sandbox/VM will keep you safe, which isn't so true since few years.

Don't get me wrong, I also do things I shouldn't, like downloading torrents, but I run them on a spare Linux machine, this is a real safe container, because I don't care of it being infected, /format Lol.
That's what I do now. I have a separate box. But when I was a broke uni student that wasn't an option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Correlate and Umbra

Burrito

Level 21
Verified
Actually they turned out better than I expected. 14/19 zero day isn’t bad. Better than before at least, but not something I’d use as my main line of defense.
Yeah, fair enough. Webroot and Panda Dome Free both scored a miserable 8/19 of those samples. Malwarebytes was scoring on some testing similar to Webroot. Maybe there is an improvement. I hope so. I have a reason to cheer for Malwarebytes... I have multiple (like 6) lifetime licenses with them. The next AV-T will give a more full indication of how things are trending.
 

Burrito

Level 21
Verified
I would say BitDefender.
If that is the basis for judgement -- then maybe Norton.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Correlate

cătălin

Level 1
If that is the basis for judgement -- then maybe Norton.

This is just a product promotion. Anyway, go with Norton :)
See the bottom of the page: While this article is sponsored by Norton Security, I’ve actually used it for ten years and after digging into WikiLeaks and seeing that the CIA wasn’t able to hack into it, I can easily recommend it for all your devices security needs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Correlate

Nightwalker

Level 18
Verified
Content Creator
But he is somehow right, he doesn't need to be an expert. In real life most AV/suites behave the same, detect > alert or block/quarantine.

All those test aren't really worthy, a risky user will encounter, what ? 3 malware a month, a normal one maybe one a year...me? none in 20+ years, i had to go to malware referencing site to find some to play with...LOL.

The real difference is how the user respond. I can use the worst AV ever made, i will be safer than a happy clicker with the self-claimed "best" AV.

Also, you can't compare what isn't comparable, to be comparable properly, the products must have the same features and be used the same way, which is hardly the case now.

So yes he is right, if i was a noob coming on this thread, i will probably will be misguided by emotionally-guided opinions.
The only thing you can be sure is the AV's reliability not efficiency (which varies depending of the context).

so "best, powerful, strongest, blablabla" aren't the right terms to use, "reliable" is.
With all the respect he is wrong and so are you, the topic is about the most powerful antivirus, not about how imperfect antivirus solutions are and definitely not about how "great" default-deny is.

The most powerful antivirus isnt subjective and they can be compared, there are many criterias for this (emulator, signature, response time, behavior blocker, malware rollback damage, heuristics, reputation module and so on), although many users confused this with the "best" antivirus in their minds and usually it is simple the solution that they are running.

The most powerful antivirus can be measure by past professional test results combined with user experience and an overall looking at the product technology itself.

By alll means that should be Kaspersky, this is a fact, not an opinion, there is no other solution that have the same level of default protection or potential protection when tweaked, @harlan4096 tests on this forum is a testament of this fact.

Finally the most powerful isnt always the best, if this was true, everybody should just use Kaspersky and be done with it.
 

omidomi

Level 68
Verified
Trusted
Malware Hunter
1- People coming here already have some degree of paranoia.
2- Vendors push that FUD via uber-articles about super-nasty malware only them can protect against, just to boost sales.
3- Paranoids compete with other paranoids to show who has the biggest, strongest, awesome security setup which often result in performance loss and generate new issues.
Hm, whats going on VPN company? :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Correlate

omidomi

Level 68
Verified
Trusted
Malware Hunter
This is just a product promotion. Anyway, go with Norton :)
See the bottom of the page: While this article is sponsored by Norton Security, I’ve actually used it for ten years and after digging into WikiLeaks and seeing that the CIA wasn’t able to hack into it, I can easily recommend it for all your devices security needs.
Come on, CIA never try to hack own Security company, listen : "scissors never cut its legs! "
 

Umbra

Level 14
Verified
the topic is about the most powerful antivirus,
Which is a useless but recurrent discussion, if it had sense, we won't have the same thread cloned over and over.
Give what you call "the most powerful" AV to a noob happy-clicker, it will make it the "most useless" ever.

The most powerful antivirus isnt subjective and they can be compared, there are many criterias for this (emulator, signature, response time, behavior blocker, malware rollback damage, heuristics, reputation module and so on)
Sorry this is where you are wrong. You dont compare an AV with a suite, products must have same features and most don't.
You can't compare a simple scanner with a full suite having a dozen of modules.
Same as you don't compare a Volvo with a formula 1 to know which is the fastest.
All those lab test are for noobs, because they need a landmark. Those with enough skills shouldn't even look a them.
You want a real fair comparison between all of them, strip all AVs of their additional components, just test the real-time scanner without cloud and all the HIPS and co.
Until that, there is no such thing as "the most powerful", you just get the "most complete" AV and complete doesn't mean efficient.

The most powerful antivirus can be measure by past professional test results combined with user experience and an overall looking at the product technology itself.
If you still believe on lab's test...

Anyway, we visibly have different opinion about how to quantify AVs, and you know very well what i think about them. ;)
 
Last edited:

bribon77

Level 29
Verified
The best antivirus with all my respect I see that rookie question, that was the question I asked myself twenty years ago, and I have concluded that there is no such thing, if there are better or worse users. For example, you give Kasperky a newbie and he becomes infected as if he were using the worst antivirus.:)
 

Umbra

Level 14
Verified
The best antivirus with all my respect I see that rookie question, that was the question I asked myself twenty years ago, and I have concluded that there is no such thing, if there are better or worse users. For example, you give Kasperky a newbie and he becomes infected as if he were using the worst antivirus.:)
Exactly. i always told people here and there:
1- Use what you are the most comfortable with or the one offering what you looking for in term of components.
2- Learn all its intricacies and cons, then you will make the best of it.
3- don't believe those self-claimed "independent" labs, they are marketing proxies for AV vendors...AV business is a big and juicy market, everyone want his share, labs included. Why do you think they ask exorbitant prices to vendors, and when they get big money from them, they obviously can't be so "independent". I didn't see yet a lab test results where all the AVs score under 50%, it is easy to do it, just use obfuscated malware or scripts, why they don't? because who will pay to have bad advertisements....
4- Don't change your AV based on point 3.