Advice Request Best Antivirus for my Family

[Andy Ful]

Public DNS malware filters to be tested in 2025

How well do the largest public DNS resolvers that protect you against malware domains perform in June 2025? We put them to the test!

techblog.nexxwave.eu

dns0.eu is basically then same as NextDNS regarding this test. (same developers)

NextDNS was not tested by techblog.nexxwave.eu. Furthermore, this test (and most others) does not show the real picture. As indicated in the report, the domains were mainly older than one day, and the data were from the last six months. Almost all samples were older than one week.

However, about half of newly created phishing websites remain undetected in the wild during their first week of existence.

Deep Dive into Phishing Chronology: Threats and Trends - Zimperium

This article will focus on the Phishing Chronology. Analyzing 88014 phishing URLs collected from public sources and Zimperium data, we will show how dynamic and fast evolving are the phishing threats.

zimperium.com

The techblog.nexxwave.eu test was primarily conducted on already well-detected websites; however, the most interesting result related to evasive phishing remains unknown.

Many of the less than week-old websites can be blocked by advanced features (blocking newly registered domains, AI, etc.). Such features are not activated in the free versions of DNS resolvers tested by techblog.nexxwave.eu. However, NextDNS can apply those advanced features when using the free version with the Configuration ID.

Post corrected.

 

[Trident]

Is it better than f-secure or AVG Ultimate? It is possible to use Sandboxed Web Browser

It’s certainly better than F-Secure, AVG/Avast are difficult to beat on web blocking. That web blocking was conceived very early years (just like SiteAdvisor) by a company called Exploit Prevention Labs and used real-time analysis from the start. That being said, in the early years it was a disaster for web admins.
Anyway, LinkScanner/Web Shield still use heavy real time analysis. McAfee’s recent patents involve rendering web sites in “invisible” browser, analysing the visual elements (even logos and favicons), grammar and also, fingerprinting visually malicious pages.

So McAfee Web Advisor and AVG/Avast would be on par. Trend Micro in more aggressive mode would be together with them and in business & mobile products, it can block all untested websites.

F-Secure unfortunately can’t compete with McAfee, AVG/Avast and Trend Micro. The sandboxed browser doesn’t improve the detection of malicious sites, it prevents data exfiltration by untrusted entities whilst you are banking.

 

[monkeylove]

He is Polish, so he is fine with almost everything else. He just has beef with Russia.

From what I know, the goal of "eyes nations" is for software companies to work with Western governments and turn over user information. In short, these governments spy on their own citizens and even share info with each other.

I don't know how one can be upset by one government doing that but not another.

Given that, you are better off avoiding most of those software companies, and just stick to highly-secure open-source operating systems, browsers, etc. Avoid most websites, too, because they work with the same companies.

 

[KnownStormChaser]

From what I know, the goal of "eyes nations" is for software companies to work with Western governments and turn over user information. In short, these governments spy on their own citizens and even share info with each other.

I don't know how one can be upset by one government doing that but not another.

Given that, you are better off avoiding most of those software companies, and just stick to highly-secure open-source operating systems, browsers, etc. Avoid most websites, too, because they work with the same companies.

He is not upset with data collection for governments. He just does not want to support anything Russian.

 

[rashmi]

I won't be using windows defender for them. I need something that works on all devices and that has better web protection than only in Edge.

McAfee seems ideal; its new versions are lightweight, offer efficient malware/website protection and simple alerts, plus inexpensive multi-device licenses are available online.

 

[Sorrento]

The OP, wanted a system of protection for Parents: I no longer have parents but with my mother when she was alive who had a lappy I found out the rule was & with others who don't know much the simper the better: UNLESS - You enjoy phone calls that the person cannot get on a certain site etc or this no longer works, I apply this to both my daughters PC's , my wife, & certainty my neighbour who I see every day who has the ability to stop a childproof fisher price toy to stop working for unknown reasons

 

[Marko :)]

I'm confused... when we suddenly started to love McAfee? I remember it was always being the antivirus software you don't want on your PC. What happened?

 

[roger_m]

I'm confused... when we suddenly started to love McAfee? I remember it was always being the antivirus software you don't want on your PC. What happened?

Early last year they released a new version that was rewritten from scratch. The new version had better detection rates, so it no longer fell short of other big name antiviruses. Due to further improvements since then, it now is one of the best antiviruses. In addition, the new McAfee is one of the lightest antiviruses there is. Maybe you haven't seen the following thread about it.

App Review - McAfee Protection (Plus Plans, Total Protection, LiveSafe)

Hello guys and welcome to this McAfee review. Before we get to the McAfee details (which will be discussed in great depth), I would like to discuss the upgrade to my practices across this forum. This forum is not for promotion of favouritism, it is designed mainly as a technical and objective...

malwaretips.com

 

[Marko :)]

Early last year they released a new version that was rewritten from scratch. The new version had better detection rates, so it no longer fell short of other big name antiviruses. Due to further improvements since then, it now is one of the best antiviruses. In addition, the new McAfee is one of the lightest antiviruses there is. Maybe you haven't seen the following thread about it.

App Review - McAfee Protection (Plus Plans, Total Protection, LiveSafe)

Hello guys and welcome to this McAfee review. Before we get to the McAfee details (which will be discussed in great depth), I would like to discuss the upgrade to my practices across this forum. This forum is not for promotion of favouritism, it is designed mainly as a technical and objective...

malwaretips.com

Who are we hating now then?

 

[roger_m]

Who are we hating now then?

Webroot is a usual suspect.

 

[rashmi]

Webroot is a usual suspect.

Webroot must be paying you ... The internet collectively hates Comodo!

 

[stonjean633]

Webroot is close to conviction. But it' not alone.
After more than 2 weeks, Webroot with some accomplices are still hiding in their bed sleeping.

VirusTotal

VirusTotal

www.virustotal.com

 

[Trident]

Webroot is close to conviction. But it' not alone.
After more than 2 weeks, Webroot with some accomplices are still hiding in their bed sleeping.

VirusTotal

VirusTotal

www.virustotal.com

That’s just one of the many cases Webroot is less than active in doing its job. When it comes to patent trolling, they are very active.

Webroot must be paying you ... The internet collectively hates Comodo!

We don’t hate.

Who are we hating now then?

This is not a matter of love and hate, we aren’t here to “marry” these solutions.

I think they should be evaluated objectively based on facts. If a product performs well, costs cheap, it is quiet, stable, I don’t see a reason why we should be disregarding this product.

McAfee happened to take their job (and the billions they got for the business division acquisition) seriously, they reinvented themselves and they came up with cool stuff. Example is the very little kernel presence (as opposed to ZoneAlarm for example with 15 kernel drivers), the performance is great, web blocking uses real time AI, including visual analysis and pre-execution protection uses a method where a bunch of engines all provide a verdict, “bucketize”, e.g cluster the file (based on how bad it looks) and the result is grouped as an overall verdict.

There is more to come, McAfee will soon perform heavy page analysis when user clicks on a field (similar to Check Point Zero Phishing), the patent has been granted, and will perform targeted scans based on user-described symptoms, analysed by an LLM. Patents take 18 months to be made public, so who knows what else McAfee is working on.

If Webroot tomorrow makes these improvements, we will reflect that and we’ll also use Webroot. But so far there are a few products that rely on the same old, same old, and don’t really improve.

There is nothing we can say about such products and there is no reason to favour obsolescence instead of modern.

 

[simmerskool]

I think they should be evaluated objectively based on facts. If a product performs well, costs cheap, it is quiet, stable, I don’t see a reason why we should be disregarding

digression: a good product does not have to "cheap" for me to try it or buy if it preforms well, is quiet & stable. I dislike the marketing models where the initial cost is $n, and to renew it next year the cost is $3n or $4n. On the official US site, at least McAfee clearly warned me in advance that's what they are going to do with my license. And some of the payment processing services can make it a PIA to cancel renewal. Not saying McAfee does / or will do that, just a general rant.

 

[KnownStormChaser]

digression: a good product does not have to "cheap" for me to try it or buy if it preforms well, is quiet & stable. I dislike the marketing models where the initial cost is $n, and to renew it next year the cost is $3n or $4n. On the official US site, at least McAfee clearly warned me in advance that's what they are going to do with my license. And some of the payment processing services can make it a PIA to cancel renewal. Not saying McAfee does / or will do that, just a general rant.

Regarding the increase in price, most software does this, not just AVs. I typically buy AV keys from resellers which are much cheaper, and I don't have to worry about an increased price after the first year. It's always the same price, usually.

 

[stonjean633]

I'm still puzzled why ESET cost the most nowadays. Priciest does not mean it's the best.
I find nothing extra ordinary with it.The features get lesser and lesser and need to pay a premium for the top tier but the detection is just the same with the rest.

Maybe because it' made in europe?

 

[Parkinsond]

I'm still puzzled why ESET cost the most nowadays. Priciest does not mean it's the best.
I find nothing extra ordinary with it.The features get lesser and lesser and need to pay a premium for the top tier but the detection is just the same with the rest.

Maybe because it' made in europe?

Avira, Avast, AVG, Arcabit, B, GData, mks_vir, Panda, Sophos, all are made in Europe.

 

[stonjean633]

Avira, Avast, AVG, Arcabit, B, GData, mks_vir, Panda, Sophos, all are made in Europe.

Yes but those company don't use the marketing like ESET 100%

Maybe it's their way to convince consumers that the high price is justifiable. Oh well.

 

[Parkinsond]

Yes but those company don't use the marketing like ESET 100%

Maybe it's their way to convince consumers that the high price is justifiable. Oh well.

Cannot deny ESET is the most effecient among European-based AVs.

 

[Jonny Quest]

Yes but those company don't use the marketing like ESET 100%

Maybe it's their way to convince consumers that the high price is justifiable. Oh well.

And maybe they know they have a excellent reputation especially among the savvy users that they can charge more, that "you do want us, don't you, we're the best"!?