Andrew3000

Level 6
Verified
Malware Tester
I tried sophos, what to say... is very thought about the operating system, uses too much ram memory, cpu and I/O operations on the hard disk
On the market at the moment there are very strong antivirus sounds at sophos.
Totally wrong what you said. Sophos uses so much Ram. Cpu and hardisk absolutely not.
 

Mahesh Sudula

Level 16
Verified
Malware Tester
I completed the test today.The product is tested against variety of samples including u pswd stealers.
Impression : As compared to past, Sophos really worked better this time.Nothing stellar but yes improvements are evident.
Pros : M/L system is good, Good blocking and removal ability, Anti exploit feature came into action couple of times especialy against emotets.
Cons : Weak against scriptors, so so signatures, anti phishing is ok ok.
However just my opinion, there are comparably better av over him ...like kaf, Bd
 

thrillskr

Level 2
There's always one. You do know you can Print Screen right? And I don't mean photo copy the monitor.
I know, didn’t think about it :oops: next time i Will do, but i was hurrying to go to job l and make fast pictures

@stefanos I agree but don’t forget this is a Premium suite with a lot modules. For example i tested a few other A/V suites because al the time hearing my laptop fan annoyed me. With Sophos i didn’t hear this and that’s a big plus.

@Mahesh Sudula I agree. But for normal daily users it’s a nice suite. They improved it a lot. For geeks like the most here it’s not the best choice if you like change settings etc.
 

Raiden

Level 13
Verified
Content Creator
I use SHP on and off and I like it quite a bit.

I really like the centralized managment part, but I know that it's not for everyone since it's all in the cloud. IMO going from version 1 to version 2, they have made a lot of great improvements. Personally I find it to be far lighter than it use to be in the past. The memory usage for me isn't an issue as one of my systems has 8Gb of ram and the other 16Gb, but I can see how those with less ram may be impacted. Personally, I hope that one day they will cut it down a bit and also consolodate all the processes into 1 or 2, as there are a ton of processes running.

Dispite how some may view it's recent prformance on the HUB, I actually see it quite differently. IMO I think it has improved a lot on the protection front from V1. Even some of the other tests being done outside the HUB, do infact show it to have an overall improvement from the last version. Like @Glashouse was saying, it's protection against scripting malware is weak, however this is an issue most vendors struggle with IMO, especially if you view any of @cruelsister's videos. I usually just run mine aong side OSA, but one could also combine it with VS, Syshardener, H_C, etc..., or just simply disable things like WSH, etc... ;)

IMO I think it's a very capable program and worth trying. It's currently 50% off where I live, so for like $30.00 you can cover 10 PC's/Mac's.

Like anything, I think it's worth giving it a try and If the improvements that they have done fron v1 to v2 are anything to go by, I am really excited to see what v3 brings.(y)
 

Umar.18

Level 2
I use SHP on and off and I like it quite a bit.

I really like the centralized managment part, but I know that it's not for everyone since it's all in the cloud. IMO going from version 1 to version 2, they have made a lot of great improvements. Personally I find it to be far lighter than it use to be in the past. The memory usage for me isn't an issue as one of my systems has 8Gb of ram and the other 16Gb, but I can see how those with less ram may be impacted. Personally, I hope that one day they will cut it down a bit and also consolodate all the processes into 1 or 2, as there are a ton of processes running.

Dispite how some may view it's recent prformance on the HUB, I actually see it quite differently. IMO I think it has improved a lot on the protection front from V1. Even some of the other tests being done outside the HUB, do infact show it to have an overall improvement from the last version. Like @Glashouse was saying, it's protection against scripting malware is weak, however this is an issue most vendors struggle with IMO, especially if you view any of @cruelsister's videos. I usually just run mine aong side OSA, but one could also combine it with VS, Syshardener, H_C, etc..., or just simply disable things like WSH, etc... ;)

IMO I think it's a very capable program and worth trying. It's currently 50% off where I live, so for like $30.00 you can cover 10 PC's/Mac's.

Like anything, I think it's worth giving it a try and If the improvements that they have done fron v1 to v2 are anything to go by, I am really excited to see what v3 brings.(y)
Yeah. Absolutely right. I am currently testing it and it has impressed me with best results. They have improved static detection a lot. Machine learning detections are now actually working.
 

Slyguy

Level 42
Verified
And 300mb is is too much for my opinion
212631


In a world of 64GIG machines, 300Mb is incredibly tiny... If 300Mb is noticeable, you need something other than a machine made in the early 2000's. Anyway, that aside. SHP is one of the best suites you can get and the price is excellent. Hub doesn't reflect real world activity, and when all of the modules are factored, SHP is quite protective, especially with it's heuristic web filtration. Once my Panda Dome sub runs out for friends and family they're moving to SHP.
 

bob974

Level 4
I do not really understand this debate on the use of memory. If I trust the reaction of my computer, Sophos is almost imperceptible. No slowdown noted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seyyed Akram

stefanos

Level 24
Verified
View attachment 212631

In a world of 64GIG machines, 300Mb is incredibly tiny... If 300Mb is noticeable, you need something other than a machine made in the early 2000's. Anyway, that aside. SHP is one of the best suites you can get and the price is excellent. Hub doesn't reflect real world activity, and when all of the modules are factored, SHP is quite protective, especially with it's heuristic web filtration. Once my Panda Dome sub runs out for friends and family they're moving to SHP.
Many members on MT is with 4GB RAM. And sure we have diferent opinions. For me the Panda is it is the worst payed protection . And why to pay for protections worse than free.
 

Slyguy

Level 42
Verified
I propose to my friends and family windows defender + Hard Configurator . Free and most secure for Panda and SHP
1) I don't trust Microsoft with security.
2) I don't trust Microsoft with privacy.
3) Windows Defender is HEAVY
4) Windows Defender has no effective Web Filtration, and doesn't cover several vectors, including but not limited to DNS hijack and lateral network attacks.

Panda Dome Advanced is actually sufficiently protective for the vast number of regular Joe users. Toss in Syshardener with it, and you are pretty much good to go. Also, Panda has a pretty effective Firewall, which also protects DHCP spoofing, lateral attacks, TCP injection attempts and DNS corruption. But the biggest thing with PDA is the ability to cover unlimited devices for about $34 for 3 years and Panda Dome Advanced Mobile Security is actually one of the best Android Security Suites.
 

stefanos

Level 24
Verified
1) I don't trust Microsoft with security.
2) I don't trust Microsoft with privacy.
3) Windows Defender is HEAVY
4) Windows Defender has no effective Web Filtration, and doesn't cover several vectors, including but not limited to DNS hijack and lateral network attacks.

Panda Dome Advanced is actually sufficiently protective for the vast number of regular Joe users. Toss in Syshardener with it, and you are pretty much good to go. Also, Panda has a pretty effective Firewall, which also protects DHCP spoofing, lateral attacks, TCP injection attempts and DNS corruption. But the biggest thing with PDA is the ability to cover unlimited devices for about $34 for 3 years and Panda Dome Advanced Mobile Security is actually one of the best Android Security Suites.
I do not have to say anything. The results speak for me.

And the most importand. FREE. And if one friend not like windows i will propose Kaspersky free
 

Slyguy

Level 42
Verified
Hub is absolutely meaningless to me so citing them has no bearing, and I don't observe any activity there. I wouldn't subject family/friends to Kaspersky (or anything Russian/Chinese quite honestly).

But back to the subject at hand.. SHP is quite competent and very economical.
 

stefanos

Level 24
Verified
I use chinese and russian products more from 15 years. I am still alive. Anyway you have your opinion and i have mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nestor

Raiden

Level 13
Verified
Content Creator
I took a look at the ram usage on my laptop and it seems like it's ideling around 235mb. I will try to recalculate it again to make sure I didn't miss anything, but maybe the higher ram usage could be when it's updating/scanning something?


A look and a comparison in HUB with Kaspersky free example?? ;)
I actually seen an improvement with SHP on the HUB with the current 2.0 version from the 1.0 version. With the older version, they didn't have any tamper protection and it and the OS would get trashed, however with the now included tamper protection and ML componet you don't see that anymore. It defintly detects more than the previous version, but it does have issues with scripts, but that can be convered by using OSA, VS, etc...

I really don't worry about that too much when I see "system infected", as we all know nothing is perfect and can miss things. I look at it as if there is 15 samples and it missed 2 (even if the system is infected), it did quite well IMO. The same can be said for any other product for that matter. While it would be nice to see clean system everytime for every product, but that isn't the reality unfortunatly.;)(y)
 
Last edited:

stefanos

Level 24
Verified
I took a look at the ram usage on my laptop and it seems like it's ideling around 235mb. I will try to recalculate it again to make sure I didn't miss anything, but maybe the higher ram usage could be when it's updating/scanning something?




I actually seen an improvement with SHP on the HUB with the current 2.0 version from the 1.0 version. With the older version, they didn't have any tamper protection and it and the OS would get trashed, however with the now included tamper protection and ML componet you don't see that anymore. It defintly detects more than the previous version, but it does have issues with scripts, but that can be convered by using OSA, VS, etc...

I really don't worry about that too much when I see "system infected", as we all know nothing is perfect and can miss things. I look at it as if there is 15 samples and it missed 2 (even if the system is infected), it did quite well IMO. The same can be said for any other product for that matter. While it would be nice to see clean system everytime for every product, but that isn't the reality unfortunatly.;)(y)
My friends i do not hate any protection products. When I have time i like to make test with antivirus. And after i say my experiences from the product, and my personal opinion. But this i will tell always. If i will pay for one antivirus i want good and light protection. I not want combo with syshardener or OSArmor or VS to i feel secure. If i will use combo i not need to give one euro to be safe.
 
Last edited: