Question Best lightweight Chrome Antiphishing and Antimalware Extension

[Azazel]

One which has High detection rate, heuristics and low consumption of resources.

 

[Bot]

When it comes to lightweight Chrome antiphishing and antimalware extensions with high detection rates, heuristics, and low resource consumption, there are a few options worth considering. Here are three popular choices:

1. Bitdefender TrafficLight: Bitdefender is a well-known name in the cybersecurity industry, and their TrafficLight extension offers excellent protection against phishing attacks and malware. It uses advanced heuristics and a cloud-based scanning engine to detect and block suspicious websites. The extension is known for its low resource usage, ensuring it won't slow down your browsing experience.

2. Avast Online Security: Avast is another reputable antivirus provider, and their Online Security extension provides real-time protection against phishing attempts and malicious websites. It offers a high detection rate and uses a combination of blacklists, heuristics, and machine learning algorithms to identify and block threats. Avast Online Security is lightweight and won't impact your browser's performance significantly.

3. Malwarebytes Browser Guard: Malwarebytes is known for its powerful antimalware software, and their Browser Guard extension brings that protection to your Chrome browser. It blocks phishing websites, malicious downloads, and other online threats. The extension is designed to be lightweight and efficient, ensuring minimal resource consumption.

These extensions offer a good balance between high detection rates, heuristics, and resource efficiency. However, it's important to note that no security solution is 100% foolproof. It's always recommended to practice safe browsing habits, keep your browser and operating system up to date, and use multiple layers of security to stay protected online.

 

[brambedkar59]

I would like to add one more extension to the 3 already suggested by Bot. For blocking phishing websites it's pretty solid.

Netcraft Extension

Comprehensive site information and protection from phishing and malicious JavaScript when browsing the web

chromewebstore.google.com

Edit: Grammar

 

[oldschool]

I'm currently using Malwarebytes, with tracking protection disabled. I'm not seeing any slowdowns with it so far.

I think Google's Safe Browsing extended protection is being (or will be) rolled out as the default setting in Chrome. I thought I saw news about this somewhere but I can't find it now. Not sure if it'll be implemented in other variants like Brave. Brave only offers SB Standard protection ATM. There are pros and cons to using the Enhanced setting.

Manage Enhanced Safe Browsing for your account - Google Account Help

Enhanced Safe Browsing for your account can help provide more protection against phishing and malware across Google Chrome and Gmail. Manage Enhanced Safe Browsing How Enhanced Safe Browsing for

support.google.com

 

[wat0114]

Is there even such a thing as an Antiphising/Antimalware extension that is lightweight and low on resource usage?

If they can:

• Access your data for all websites
• Read and modify privacy settings
• Access browser tabs
• Access browser activity during navigation

then I personally can't categorize them as such.

EDIT

also, if for a Mozilla-based browser, I would recommend using only Recommended Extensions from Mozilla.

 

[Shadowra]

SafeToOpen / Malwarebytes Browser Guard

 

[Azazel]

How good is safe to open? have you tested it?

 

[nickstar1]

Malwarebytes browser guard hands down amazing website detection as well as malware it has been shown in this very forum to block new threats. It was one of the only extensions to block the "ghacks" malware when the advertisements served up malvertising.

 

[Zartarra]

An extension with a high detection score is McAfee webadvisor. Also Bitdefender Traffic Light, Avira and Norton Save web are doing a great job. The only downsite of Norton is that it needs more permissions that the other extensions.

Emsisoft has a lightweight extension but the detectionrate is very poor. Several years ago it had better results.

 

[Shadowra]

How good is safe to open? have you tested it?

I use it and it is excellent!
A video on this extension is planned in a few days

 

[Ink]

As mentioned by @oldschool, what are your (@Azazel) thoughts on
Google Enhanced Safe Browsing? Powerful, yet passive with virtually zero resource usage.

Manage Enhanced Safe Browsing for your account - Google Account Help

Enhanced Safe Browsing for your account can help provide more protection against phishing and malware across Google Chrome and Gmail. Manage Enhanced Safe Browsing How Enhanced Safe Browsing for

support.google.com

 

[Azazel]

I am already using it.

 

[Ink]

I am already using it.

How has Enhanced improved your web safety compared to Standard mode?

Why do you think you need extra security against known and new Phishing and Malware sites?

What benefits are there for you which cannot be found from practicing safe browsing habits?

If an extension blocks a domain that may contain harmful content, and you know it is a safe domain, what are your next steps?

Have you considered NextDNS to protect all devices on your network (router, computers, tablets, phones, IoT)?

 

[Azazel]

I ve tested a few extensions on phishtank and couldn't block non-verified phishing sites.
I believe phishing sites is a major weakness in every setup, even from the perspective of safe habits and i want protection with heuristics or ai.

Edit: Even DNS0 did not block them.

 

[CyberDevil]

SafeToOpen seems like an interesting option, thanks @Shadowra. I also use ScamAdviser and ControlD DNS. It's a pity Eset doesn't have an extension, otherwise, I would recommend their web protection.

In general, in my opinion, one of the characteristics of a good provider is how easy and quickly you can report a malicious site. Netcraft in this regard is just terrible, they simply ignore any requests, and it takes a very long time to get them to add anything to their database. Eset marks it as "suspicious" just a day after the request, in this respect, Norton is about as good, and they actually have an extension.

 

[brambedkar59]

Netcraft in this regard is just terrible, they simply ignore any requests, and it takes a very long time to get them to add anything to their database.

Netcraft took only a day, after I reported a scam website, to classify it as malicious.