Best PAID antivirus?

[509322]

2% wouldn't sink us in support calls and man hours but would be a substantial burden, anything higher could be catastrophic. But yes, in addition to a very low FP environment being a requirement for us we practice proactive whitelisting of known problem applications or potential conflicts. The folks up front get really angry when clients complain and man hours per client surpass what they feel is acceptable.

Some businesses don't have a vetting procedure prior to doing anything. LOL... you know the outcome. During vetting I see 0 to ~1.5 % FPs. The stuff gets verified and whitelisted. After it is basically on-going maintenance as required.

The industry average is somewhere along that 1 to 2 % range. Microsoft is currently at approx. 1.3 % FPs in their security solutions.

Enterprises use PUPs all the time. And most of the times enterprise IT matters are not tightly managed. That is the average enterprise IT reality.

 

[509322]

The folks up front get really angry when clients complain and man hours per client surpass what they feel is acceptable.

If a client ever complains about hours, then they get the auto-reply "then fix it yourself. You created it, so you fix it."

 

[low L!fe]

i install zemana antimalware protable
source www.softpedia.com
norton is remeved it

Image - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting
i trust norton or bitdefender
i not trust zemana or malwarebytes

 

[ForgottenSeer 58943]

i install zemana antimalware protable
source www.softpedia.com
norton is remeved it

Image - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting
i trust norton or bitdefender
i not trust zemana or malwarebytes

Your trust is misplaced if you put it on Norton.

Softpedia? Really dude? You downloaded Softpedias launcher/installer with bundled spyware which is basically a hijacked version of Zemana Portable that installs additional things. Try getting Zemana from the PROPER source, like the developers website.

Zemana - AntiMalware and AntiLogger Protection

 

[mekelek]

I can't in good conscience recommend Norton. Most of the worst infections we deal with are on systems with Norton installed. Case in point, one I am working on now (break fix customer) its astoundingly infected and Norton of course is humming right along telling them that they are safe. We do on average, as a company, 3,000-5,000 break-fix malware removals a year. Our managed clients this number shrinks down to only a few hundred because of the blended security and proper education combined with good management practices. But Norton/Symantec is a product we'd never recommend. Just my opinion.

I personally would love to see if those executables are just laying in the downloads folder or something is actually in memory.
except that hollow process one.

 

[jetman]

I often read the SE Labs reports - I think they are a useful source of information. In general, they find Kaspersky and Norton to be good but Bitdefender has had some mixed results.

 

[ozone]

i install zemana antimalware protable
source www.softpedia.com
norton is remeved it

Image - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting
i trust norton or bitdefender
i not trust zemana or malwarebytes

When downloading AV i would rather use use official site then 3rd party.
Some AV vendors detect ZAM, HitmanPro and Windows Firewall Control as malwares, it's false positive.

 

[kamla5abi]

I personally would love to see if those executables are just laying in the downloads folder or something is actually in memory.
except that hollow process one.

did you run a manual scan from norton prior to the zemana one?
i guess it depends if norton does automated/scheduled scans or not too?
And I'm guessing Norton doesn't scan on download of a file (otherwise Norton's sigs would have caught those downloads no? unless norton didn't have those sigs at the time i guess...i dunno) seeing how theres multiple copies of the same thing (at least 2 from the screenshot shown) maybe the user went and downloaded some "random stuff" lol. Maybe norton would have got it upon execution...?

if you did do scans by norton before zemana, and norton missed all that, then i have nothing more to add lol results are results

 

[mekelek]

did you run a manual scan from norton prior to the zemana one?
i guess it depends if norton does automated/scheduled scans or not too?
And I'm guessing Norton doesn't scan on download of a file (otherwise Norton's sigs would have caught those downloads no? unless norton didn't have those sigs at the time i guess...i dunno) seeing how theres multiple copies of the same thing (at least 2 from the screenshot shown) maybe the user went and downloaded some "random stuff" lol. Maybe norton would have got it upon execution...?

if you did do scans by norton before zemana, and norton missed all that, then i have nothing more to add lol results are results

Norton does scans when files get accessed, like opening a folder.
thing is, malware that aren't executed and just laying around doesn't really cause any harm. when Norton updates and gets signatures on them they get cleaned up, or blocked after execution.

also Zemana is prone to FPs imo.

 

[ForgottenSeer 58943]

This picture is gold

If you think that's gold.. Here's another from today. A break fix client called in an 'emergency' on their systems. Symantec, working like a charm, as usual. This is why I cannot recommend Norton/Symantec to anyone other than someone I hate... IMO it just doesn't work.

 

[bobby holla]

I recommend Emsisoft it's a strong IMO. made several malware test with it kaspersky and bitdefender did not come any close. it BB is superb with no competition.

 

[Xahl]

There really isn't a "best" antivirus, but if i have to recommend one it would be kaspersky. The reason for that is its a really good price for its protection/features.

 

[HarborFront]

Norton does scans when files get accessed, like opening a folder.
thing is, malware that aren't executed and just laying around doesn't really cause any harm. when Norton updates and gets signatures on them they get cleaned up, or blocked after execution.

also Zemana is prone to FPs imo.

I would prefer an AV which can

1) Scan and disinfect during the downloading of the file
2) Scan and disinfect when the file is being accessed
3) Scan and disinfect when the file is being loaded and running in memory
4) Scan and disinfect file lying around, doing nothing and waiting for action type

Which AV can do these?

 

[frogboy]

There really isn't a "best" antivirus, but if i have to recommend one it would be kaspersky. The reason for that is its a really good price for its protection/features.

Agreed 100% there is no such thing as best AV.

 

[509322]

I would prefer an AV which can

1) Scan and disinfect during the downloading of the file
2) Scan and disinfect when the file is being accessed
3) Scan and disinfect when the file is being loaded and running in memory
4) Scan and disinfect file lying around, doing nothing and waiting for action type

Which AV can do these?

The only ones that I know that offer file disinfection are G DATA and Kaspersky - after a scan.

 

[RoboMan]

The only ones that I know that offer file disinfection are G DATA and Kaspersky - after a scan.

Indeed, Kaspersky at least is one of them, i've seen the option many times configuring it.

By the way, in my tests on BitDefender Internet Security for the Malware Hub i have seen multiple times options for disinfection. On static scans, on dynamic executions, on malware found on memory.