Guide | How To Anti-Virus & Malware = Myths and Facts

[Nico@FMA]

Hello everyone,

Since I joined this great community, I have been engaged in many interesting topic's, heated discussions and most of them I enjoyed very much.
During those conversations I did have the privilege to get to know some of you and what I did notice is that there are some who are technically very skilled and have a wealth of info to share, and there you got those who do not know much and base their skills and opinions upon what the masses publish on the internet.
And then you got those people who are called wannabe experts....

There are some really great guides written on the internet, and there is so much knowledge out there that its perfectly understandable if one does not know which is right & wrong, true or plausible.
Because like it or not there are millions of webpages and blogs out there written by so called wannabe experts.
And in my line of work I come across so many people that based their options upon these information sources.

Does that mean that all those webpages and blogs are totally baseless and wrong?
No not at all, some of them actually do have some valid info.
However most of this info is one sided, incorrect or seemingly altered to fill a blog post.
Note that most of these blogs do not have ANY relation to the industry itself and thus by no means represent its standards.

I am by no means going to pass judgment, and I am not going to claim that I know it all, and neither am I going to portray myself as the ultimate UBER expert.
Because I am not in the position to pass judgment, and neither am I mister know it all.
And I am not going to spend the next 30 minutes writing this HUGE topic with the aim to bullshit you and ruin my reputation. So you might wanna give me a break here as I am going to say some controversial and to some even sensational comments based upon my 15+ years of professional experience in the computer industry.
And based upon that experience I hope you will give me a fair shot in explaining some basic things about security software.

Allow me to explain some according to my knowledge.

1:
This test says that, this report say this.
Who gives the best protection?
Who has the highest detection rate?
Who is the best?
Who has the best removal options?

Testing security software is a integral part of the industry and it serves a basic function which provides security developers with a external baseline and way to test their product outside their own protected environment using various techniques and methodologies.

So these tests are usually a indication for the developers and costumers about what to expect from a product at that particular point in time.
Often if a security developer reviews the report they make macro changes into their product to solve issues and to fine tune their end product.

That being said those tests can cloud your judgment and give you a false indication about a antivirus program, if you do not understand how, what and where.
Some say look program X has 99% detection rate...(Yell JUMP jump HYPER hyper) so program X must be the best out there and all others suck.
People that's BS at best...

Some say I have used this product for years and never did have a virus. Really?
Sure whatever makes you feel comfortable....
Fact is most home users are like sheep, they move in the direction all other sheeps move.
That sounds really disrespectful but its the truth.

Imagine if one person says: Uber Antivirus is the best
Some say: Whatever sure.
If 100000 persons say: Uber Antivirus is the best
Some say: I got to try that.
If 1 million people say: Uber Antivirus is the best.
Then suddenly its the biggest discovery since penicillin.

Imagine 1 million people equals 1 million unique idea's and opinions.
Put them in one room, have them talk for 5 minutes then suddenly you got 1 million people and 1 common idea and opinion.

Does that make a product good or bad? Hell no people.... wake up.
Companies like: ESET, Kaspersky, Symantec, TrendMicro, Mcafee and others spend millions of dollars in research, testing and development... Do you really think they are as bad as some of the tests indicate? Or do you really think that they are as bad as some members claim?

example: Mister X used Sophos and due to a friend he tested Malwarebytes, and guess what?
Malwarebytes found 12 malicious files.
So Mister X comes here on the forum and writes a topic: Sophos sucks & Malwarebytes Rocks.

What Mister X did not tell you is that he ignored basic practices, that he did not follow clear written protocols and that he is using keygens, cracks, torrents and a pirated windows which he downloaded from link: http://iamhackingyou-but-youfailto-realizeit.com and that he did not update his PC and config since the stone age.

There you got one sheep planting a opinion on a huge forum like this one.
Now as you probably guessed Mister X is not the only one breaking every rule...
There are millions across the internet.

And then suddenly Sophos has become the nightmare program of the century.
Truth is that you did not allow Sopshos to protect you in the way they intended.
Or did they do all the above things? I do not think so.
Rules and guide's & protocols are there for a reason.
If you fail to plan you plan to fail its THAT simple.

When push comes to shove it really does not matter if you use Sophos, ESET, Mcafee, Symantec, Bitdefender, Trentmicro, Panda, F-Secure and others, they all will protect you and they all will be capable enough to deal with past, present and even future based dangers.

Test results are NOT written in stone and they are just a indication.
Also each program works in their own unique way, some have a kick ass scanner and some have a better removal module..
A Antivirus package cannot be judged just by its detection, one should judge it over the entire spectrum of its capabilities. On top of that basic practices and protocols should be applied or ANY AV will be rendered useless.
(PS did you just click on the above link? you serious? omg... FAIL.)

Most people do not realize that the antivirus industry has various agreements that guarantee a baseline level of protection which has been formally agreed in the industry.
So pick any of the above names and you will be fine.

Also the comparison between Internet Security Solutions Versus Dedicated tools is comparing a donkey versus a duck.
For example how on earth can you compare NIS and Mbam?
Malwarebytes is a dedicated tool, while NIS is a: Jack of all trades, master of none!!
Just realize that there are so many programs out there, and each one does have its own tools and options.
But they are all different and have their own ways, but at the same time they are very much the same.
They all want to protect you and they all try to offer just that.
The hard part is understanding how these programs are going to protect you, and more importantly what you need to do to make sure that a program can perform optimally.

And a test report or a simple review based upon some new malware is not going to do that for you.

 

[Nico@FMA]

2: Choose your Antivirus how to?
There are a lot of factors to take into account when you’re trying to select the best antivirus solution for your needs. With the security of your data, digital identity and financial transactions at stake, it’s worthwhile investing some time in assessing each antivirus product.

Furthermore, if you make extensive use of the Internet, email, messaging and other web services, it’s important to consider a solution that includes Internet security software and technologies that can make your online activities much safer.

Criteria to help you get the best virus protection:
Unfortunately, not all antivirus products provide a reliable, usable solution that delivers an adequate level of protection against malware. When measured against the following criteria, even the market’s top 10 antivirus solutions may achieve very different scores:

•Reliability
Even the most thorough antivirus solution can prove to be absolutely useless if it conflicts with other software that’s running in your computer. If these conflicts lead to a malfunction or temporary suspension in the antivirus protection processes, that could leave you vulnerable.
•Usability
If the day-to-day operation of an antivirus solution requires special skills, it may be impractical for many users. Any antivirus product that is awkward to use, asks the user complex questions or needs the user to make difficult decisions, is likely to increase the chances of ‘operator errors’. In some cases, if the antivirus software is too difficult to run, the user may simply disable it.
•Comprehensive protection
An antivirus solution should deliver constant protection for all computer domains, all types of files and all network elements that could be subject to attack by a computer virus or other malware. The program should be able to detect malicious code and also protect all channels or entry points to the computer — including email, the Internet, FTP and more.
•Quality of protection
Antivirus solutions need to be able to operate in an aggressive environment that is constantly changing with new computer viruses, worms and Trojan viruses that can be much more complex than previously known malware, and may include new ways of avoiding the actions of antivirus programs.
Quality of protection partly depends on the following:
Effectiveness of malware detection processes
Frequency and regularity of updates
Ability to remove infections from the computer
Efficiency in delivering computer protection – without significant impact on the computer’s performance

•Free Antivirus or Premium
1: It will never happen to me.
2: I won’t click on anything I don’t recognize.
3: Only uneducated computer users get viruses.
4: I don’t need to pay for antivirus software.
5: Free antivirus is better and cheaper then premium one.
Do any of these statements sound familiar? As we’re all aware, we live in an ever-changing world in regards to technology. Ask yourself, do you keep up with the latest cyber-security threats and viruses? If not, don’t worry, Its my job to stay updated. I personally recommend to use a robust antivirus that will keep your computer protected from the latest viruses and cyber-security threats.
You may be thinking that a free antivirus is a good, cost-effective solution. Unfortunately, it isn’t. Think for a moment, what motivation does a company have for offering a good free antivirus product? Many of the companies that offer free antivirus products also offer a paid version. Which version do you think is the most up-to-date? Which version do you think is the most efficient at keeping your computer safe? The paid version. Many free antivirus software include advertisements. Many times these advertisements are often the cause of infections in the first place! By purchasing a good antivirus upfront you are essentially achieving a baseline protection and system hardening. Lets say you disregard my advice and use a free antivirus; if you become infected, the cost to clean the virus has cost you at least 1 and a half times the amount the paid antivirus would have cost on the front end.

Obviously I am not talking about some annoying little Trojan, I am talking about a real virus.
How many people come here on the forum asking for malware removal even tho they have a free antivirus running?
Remember the example about Mister X?
Also did you know that most free antivirus gather surfing habits? anonymous statistic's and other information about your pc? Keep in mind there is no such thing as free.
I am not saying that Free antivirus should be avoided, no I am saying free antivirus is MUCH better then NO protection at all.

Here let me give some more examples.
Paid-for security software

• Paid-for software provides an high grade all-round antivirus, antispyware and firewall solution accessed through a single interface.
• Individual components are automatically updated at the same time so you get protection against the latest threats.
• Most security suites come with multi-user licenses so you can install the same protection on two or more computers in your home.
• Many include useful extras, such as performance management or backup and recovery tools that can help you restore your computer in the event of a disaster.
• Paid-for security suites provide expert customer and technical support.
• Higher detection and removal capabilities.
• Sophisticated intrusion detection and identity protection.
• Emergency updates and vulnerability updates.
• Advanced dedicated removal tools and patches.
• Compatible with virtually any software including custom software.

Paid-for security software cons

• Security suites can be expensive – usually around 30-50 Euro, and you’ll also face ongoing costs usually in the form of an annual subscription in order to receive updates after the initial period of protection is over (usually a year).
• You may not always need all the options a security suite provides and, therefore, you may be doubling up in some areas or paying for protection you won’t use.

Free security software pros

• It’s possible to reasonable protect your computer by using separate free antivirus, antispyware, antispam and firewall programs in tandem.
• You choose only the tools you need. If you already use a built-in firewall and antispyware program, then you may only need to install an antivirus program rather than pay for an entire security suite.
• Free antivirus software means you can try different tools to find one that suits without worrying about wasting money.

Free security software cons

• Free antivirus software provides only a minimum level of protection and lacks the extra features of paid-for software.
• You’ll have to keep each individual program updated to ensure you’re protected against most of the latest threats.
• Most free security software programs are trial versions of paid-for packages and may have time limits for how long you can use them.
• Free antivirus software is typically single-user so you’ll need to download, install and manage a separate version on all your computers.
• You’ll get limited technical support. Most free antivirus programs only have online support.
• Less advanced removal capabilities.
• Less advanced detection capabilities.
• Less advanced vulnerability protection.
• Less sophisticated overall protection.
• More false positives and more data corruption due less advanced removal options (leaving remnants)
• Free antivirus software conflicts more and has less usability and compatibility, next to performance issues.

Just a few differences out of the top of my head.
I am sure that some exceptions can be made and that I missed one or 2 things.
But lets say this paid antivirus does cost money and they are not cheap, but if take into account what you get in return across the whole spectrum then its a rather small investment which buys you the 3 most important things for a company:

• Solid security & performance.
• Continuity & Data loss protection.
• Compatibility & Flexibility.

So to get back at what I was saying within the industry it is a cold HARD fact that free antivirus regardless their claims and testing results just do not have the level of sophistication and protection that a premium package does.
And there is not a soul on the planet that can convince me otherwise because facts are facts.
So many magazines and blogs write great articles and most of them are theoretical correct, but in the real world things are VERY different.

* Do note that: Avast, Malwarebytes, Avira, AVG, Bitdefender and Comodo as free versions are pretty darn good, they have the same scanning modules as their premium versions BUT their performance and overall protection is no where near their premium packages.
Otherwise why would they offer you a premium package if the free one is just as good.
Or do you really think you only pay to have access to technical and costumer support?

•Conclusion
Your technical expertise and knowhow are perhaps the biggest factors in choosing the best software for your needs.
And last but not least the specific configuration your pc has and its present state is a HUGE factor.

That said again a VB test report is not going to make that choice for you. In fact based upon the detection percentages and reviews it might even push you towards a WRONG antivirus brand.
End of part 2

 

[Nico@FMA]

3 Can I run multiple Antivirus programs?
In most cases, it is not possible to run two antivirus programs simultaneously on a single computer.
Even though users may be tempted to try to implement what they might regard as ‘dual protection’
There are good reasons why trying to operate two different antivirus products will normally cause difficulties sooner or later.
Giving the antivirus scanner access to critical data is a MUST and having multiple programs injecting their code into your kernel is going to cause trouble.
For effective antivirus detection that protects against computer viruses, worms, Trojan viruses and more the antivirus software has to be allowed to penetrate to a suitable level within the computer... deep into the system kernel.
This is because the antivirus product needs to intercept system events, deep within the computer.
The intercepted data is then passed to the antivirus engine for analysis so the antivirus scanner can scan intercepted files, network packets and other critical data.

If there are two antivirus programs running on a single computer, they will each try to install interceptors into the same part of the system kernel. This is likely to result in conflicts between the antivirus monitors probably with one of the following consequences:
One of the two antivirus programs will fail to intercept system events.
One of the two antivirus programs might activate self-defense modus and consider the rival antivirus as corrupt or hostile.
Each antivirus program’s attempts to install parallel interceptors will cause the entire computer system to crash or they disable rival interceptors.
Registry corruption, Data loss, Service interruption, firmware corruption up to even permanent root damage.
These are HARD facts.

There is a exception to the rule: Malwarebytes can act as a passive On-Demand scanner and thus achieve a dual protection status, while respecting the integrity of the active main antivirus solution.

I have seen MANY members claiming that they are actually mixing different programs, but within the industry I can tell you I would lose my job right on the spot if I would try to run 2 antivirus programs (In Resident Active Modus) on our systems.

So let me make this VERY clear: You can run Malwarebytes in passive mode next to your active internet security package, however this is not recommended.
If you would run both in active mode you will see a wide range of problems going to come your way, as I explained above.

That being said the difference between Internet Security and a standalone tool are HUGE.
But they can mix if you use a proper configuration again this is not recommended unless you know what you are doing.
So bottom line:Your Internet Security = ACTIVE and Malwarebytes (Or similar tool) = PASSIVE.
This way you can mix between the rules and get away with it.
But realize that your Internet Security can do it all, so there is no need for another program.
But if you do insist then you accept the risk that it might backfire.
However tools like Mbam (Passive mode) and other standalone programs like Mcafee stinger can serve as a second line of passive protection (On-Demand)

In regards to running Multiple Internet Security programs say: Mcafee + Norton 360 + Kaspersky.
Doing this is so stupid and so dumb... you might as well throw your pc in the water.
You will not gain anything, and you will render your pc useless.

If I am taking the Industry as a standard (Which I do) then if anyone is claiming otherwise is going against what real experts say.
Or do you really think that the System administrator and security specialist of a huge company can get away with data loss when they find out that they mixed all kinds of security software?

That's why I keep saying Internet Security and Antimalware protection is a serious business and should be regarded as such.
For you on your home pc it really does not matter if you have to reinstall windows 15 times a year, what you got to lose? a few songs a few movies some banking details...
Let add a price tag to it. Say 100 dollar every time in data loss.
If I would do such a thing at my work, 1 hour of system & network downtime costs over 250k per server.
I would love to see how my boss is going to react when this happens due to my fault.

But if you want to mix programs... go for it, but do accept the risks.

I hope this explains why I sometimes come across like a bastard, but I did not intent to make you feel bad. You may not like my guide and you may not agree to what I wrote, but that does not make it any less true.
Virtually everyone who works within the industry will agree to what I wrote here.
Sure you doubt that right?
Well ask around on the forum, and ask yourself why this topic has been made a sticky?
Or ask a senior staff member to validate this topic.
Again my aim is not you feel bad, but my aim is to make you think and learn.
I am just trying to educate those who do not know or think they know.

PS: Umbra Polaris did write a seriously great topic I suggest that if you did spend the time to read my topic, that you honor his topic with some time as well, because the info is SPOT ON.

So if you got questions or comments please post a reply.
Cheers

 

[Deleted member 178]

very good summary , i really laughed with your example of Mr X , i encounter this case so manyyyyyy times

 

[BoraMurdar]

need to bookmark this and Umbra's topic for the new members in the future ^^

Approved!

 

[Nico@FMA]

I got approved Hyper hyper JUMP jump EEEK eeek HYPERVENTILATE .....

 

[Deleted member 178]

Comodo as free versions are pretty darn good, they have the same scanning modules as their premium versions BUT their performance and overall protection is no where near their premium packages.

Just to polish your article, Comodo is the only product (i know) where the free or paid version is similar , the paid version just gives you free support and "malware issue" insurrance in case of system screwed while CIS was in charge. Comodo gains incomes via selling certificates and business/corporate applications.

your updates are well-said too, very good article that deserve to be sticked

 

[Nico@FMA]

Just to polish your article, Comodo is the only product (i know) where the free or paid version is similar , the paid version just gives you free support and "malware issue" insurrance in case of system screwed while CIS was in charge. Comodo gains incomes via selling certificates and business/corporate applications.

your updates are well-said too, very good article that deserve to be sticked

Thank you for the kind words buddy.
In regards to Comodo (Beyond the fact I do not like them) I did not know that their premium product was a clone of their free one.
If this is the case then they just dropped another 10 points on my ranking list and they where already minus 100.

 

[Jaspion]

Excellent article. Thanks!

 

[Deleted member 178]

In regards to Comodo (Beyond the fact I do not like them) I did not know that their premium product was a clone of their free one.
If this is the case then they just dropped another 10 points on my ranking list and they where already minus 100.

it is

Comodo's moto was and will be "we don't want users pay for being protected" (or something like that.)

 

[Jaspion]

Again, I would like to thank you all for participating. It's a pleasure to be a part of such interesting discussions.

I, however, would like to point out that there is a big discrepancy still between two different ideas that I would like to see properly dissected here. The ideas I'm talking about are:

1) That a free antivirus is just as efficient in protecting you as a paid one.
2) That the above idea is crazy, because, if you pay, you obviously get more. No such thing as free lunch.

n.nvt mentioned that you don't pay just for tech support, you pay for and actually get more protection.

Other members have expressed disagreement, thought not in direct response:

Fantasy said: ↑
Oh well... Free Antiviruses doesn't protect you as much as ESET..

That's simply not true.

1). Q+CF- On scan. 139/143. Of the remaining 4 samples, 2 were doc files and I don't have Word installed on my test system. Another, WorkwithText.exe is a Russian utility that is only flagged by Symantec Reputation, so is probably a meaningless detection. The remaining file was a trojan which spawned a daughter (services.exe); this was detected by Qihoo Proactive as well as being shunted off to the sandbox.

No system changes on reboot.

2). For some reason I feel like picking on ESET, so here we go:

ESET AV 7- On scan, 131/143. When these samples were run ESET detected one other as well as a spawn from a Skype thingy, so realistically 133/143.

Of the remaining 10, one was a doc (not run) and 3 others were different flavors of the same RAT. The rest contained a couple of Bitcoin Miners, a Zbot, a keylogger, a Trojan dropper, a fake winlogon that I'm not sure what it actually does, and a couple of garden variety trojans. I list them all because they all executed successfully and loaded on reboot.

Did I mention that Malwarebytes, WD and Security Center were also deactivated by one of the trojans?

Nice Job, ESET.

So I would like to ask @n.nvt to explain why you affirm that a free antivirus can't be as good as a paid one. @Huracan, @cruelsister, and all members of course, are all invited to share their view.

Also, guys, one more thing that n.nvt brought up was the "no free lunch" thing. Suppose a free antivirus is indeed just as good as the well-established paid ones. Why then is it free? Is it collecting user data? What other interests might be behind their "free" offering? Mere advertisement for their paid solution? What of those that don't offer a paid solution?


I guess we'll have enough food for thought for all to draw their own conclusions based on well-versed observations, if these questions get addressed and opened up here.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Nico@FMA]

@Jaspion I think I already addressed those questions multiple times in the many posts I made.
Also there is no "why I think" the above guide states facts, raw, ugly truth.
These are industry facts nothing I can change about this.

What is the Difference between Free vs. Paid Antivirus Software?
The difference between the free versions of antivirus software and the paid versions are much like the differences between a trial version and a paid version of anything else. Free antivirus software tends to be very basic in its functionality. The program will scan your PC and detect if there is any malware, spyware, or viruses, and then it will delete them.
However the advanced features like emergency updates, Rapid response, dedicated tools and fine tuned detection methods are NOT available in a free version.
So the free version gives you a minimal base protection while the paid version gives you ALL that the program has to offer.

That's basically the very short version.

In regards to collecting data, advertisement and behavioral collecting + statistics are just a few things most free AV's do.
It sort of pays for your free product.

And indeed free antivirus cannot match paid versions. (Or else why anyone want to buy antivirus? if there is nothing else to offer.)
Read my post again its all there.

 

[Jaspion]

Ok. Could you point then to the part that explains why cruelsister's test is not a valid example of a paid AV being outclassed by a free one? Are you saying that if cruelsister had first paid and activated ESET in that case it would have protected the PC?

 

[Nico@FMA]

Ok. Could you point then to the part that explains why cruelsister's test is not a valid example of a paid AV being outclassed by a free one? Are you saying that if cruelsister had first paid and activated ESET in that case it would have protected the PC?

With respect to the tests being done they are a moment snap shot, and as many others have pointed out they are nice but do not have any value.
Sure they do give a indication and may point out some things but really they do not have any value.
For example:
privately and professional we are using Symantec Endpoint Protection (the whole package, management server, clients and so on)
And I dare to challenge ALL the free brands combined to provide a better security.
There is simply no contest.
Just saying to set the bar here.

In regards to free outclassing paid... based upon a sample pack is the same as 2 hunters shooting at the same deer.
Who hits first wins the prize.

Really ANY commercial product (Kaspersky, ESET, Sophos, Symantec, Mcafee, Trentmicro and other bigger names) are so close in terms of performance not as a individual tool but more across the whole spectrum as a package.
Protection does not end with detection, and neither does it stop with removal.
There is so much more to it.

And yes I confirm my previous words paid beats free hands down in real world.
Obviously I am not saying free antivirus is bad, I am saying they provide the bare minimum.
imagine how can you compare a FIAT Panda car to a BMW 700 series? they are both cars but that's about it.
Same goes for security solutions.

 

[sid_16]

Great guide! It also cleared some uncleared facts about antivirus (free/paid). Thank you sir for writing such good article.
sid_16.

 

[Nico@FMA]

Paid-for security software

• Paid-for software provides an high grade all-round antivirus, antispyware and firewall solution accessed through a single interface.
• Individual components are automatically updated at the same time so you get protection against the latest threats.
• Most security suites come with multi-user licenses so you can install the same protection on two or more computers in your home.
• Many include useful extras, such as performance management or backup and recovery tools that can help you restore your computer in the event of a disaster.
• Paid-for security suites provide expert customer and technical support.
• Higher detection and removal capabilities.
• Sophisticated intrusion detection and identity protection.
• Emergency updates and vulnerability updates.
• Advanced dedicated removal tools and patches.
• Compatible with virtually any software including custom software.

Paid-for security software cons

• Security suites can be expensive – usually around £30-£50, and you’ll also face ongoing costs usually in the form of an annual subscription in order to receive updates after the initial period of protection is over (usually a year).
• You may not always need all the options a security suite provides and, therefore, you may be doubling up in some areas or paying for protection you won’t use.

Free security software pros

• It’s possible to reasonable protect your computer by using separate free antivirus, antispyware, antispam and firewall programs in tandem.
• You choose only the tools you need. If you already use a built-in firewall and antispyware program, then you may only need to install an antivirus program rather than pay for an entire security suite.
• Free antivirus software means you can try different tools to find one that suits without worrying about wasting money.

Free security software cons

• Free antivirus software provides only a minimum level of protection and lacks the extra features of paid-for software.
• You’ll have to keep each individual program updated to ensure you’re protected against most of the latest threats.
• Most free security software programs are trial versions of paid-for packages and may have time limits for how long you can use them.
• Free antivirus software is typically single-user so you’ll need to download, install and manage a separate version on all your computers.
• You’ll get limited technical support. Most free antivirus programs only have online support.
• Less advanced removal capabilities.
• Less advanced detection capabilities.
• Less advanced vulnerability protection.
• Less sophisticated overall protection.
• More false positives and more data corruption due less advanced removal options (leaving remnants)
• Free antivirus software conflicts more and has less usability and compatibility, next to performance issues.

Just a few differences out of the top of my head.
I am sure that some exceptions can be made and that I missed one or 2 things.
But lets say this paid antivirus does cost money and they are not cheap, but if take into account what you get in return across the whole spectrum then its a rather small investment which buys you the 3 most important things for a company:

• Solid security & performance.
• Continuity & Data loss protection.
• Compatibility & Flexibility.

Cheers

Ps I just injected this piece into my guide as I just realized its rather good saves me explaining next time.

 

[Jaspion]

Thanks for your reply. But in answer to the metaphor you used, I suspect there's no snapshot test in the world that will show you a FIAT Panda beating a BMW 700 in any situation whatsoever... maybe parking space, if it counts.

 

[Deleted member 178]

excellent summary as usual nvt; for all people that has doubts about those facts: just check some solutions as example, which are the best ones to ensure an overall protection of your system.

suites:

- Emsisoft IS : paid:
- Webroot: paid
- ESET: paid:
- Norton IS: Paid
- Avast IS : paid
- Kaspersky IS: paid

the only exception is Comodo IS but you must be skilled at dealing with sudden HIPS questions.

standalone products:

- Emsisoft Mamutu (behavior Blocker): Paid
- Appguard (anti-executrable): paid
- Defensewall (sandbox + hips): paid
- Shadow Defender (system-wide virtualization): Paid
- Sandboxie (sandbox): Paid (for full capability)
- ExeRadarPro (anti-executable): paid
- MBAM (companion AV): paid
- Hitman Pro (cloud scanner): paid



the list is long... of course you can do combos with free AVs + free Firewall + free Sandbox but you will lack useful and important features.

 

[nsm0220]

n.nvt what about an av that uses 2 or more av engines whats your take on that

 

[Nico@FMA]

n.nvt what about an av that uses 2 or more av engines whats your take on that

What about it? Either using 2 engines? Or using one engine that does it all?
One might provide a bit more detection while the other might score better on a different thingy.
The end result is pretty much the same.
Sure it has been proven that dual engines could outperform single engines, but it really depend on which single engine they go up against.