Bitdefender Internet Security 2015 vs Kaspersky Internet Security 2016

  • Bitdefender Internet Security 2015

    Votes: 14 23.0%
  • Kaspersky Internet Security 2016

    Votes: 47 77.0%
  • Total voters
    61
Status
Not open for further replies.
List of apps to compare
Bitdefender Internet Security 2015 vs Kaspersky Internet Security 2016

Nightwalker

Level 16
Verified
Content Creator
What was 23rd? It was officially released today "Patch a has been officially released. Don't forget to restart your system after updating." 23rd was when the beta version was released for testing.
In your link:


Patch A for Kaspersky Internet Security 2016 has been released on 30 July, 2015.

Patch A is installed automatically with databases updates of Kaspersky Internet Security 2016 version 16.0.0.614 and fixes the following:

  • Some interface issues.
  • Some Secure Data Input issues
To install Patch A:

  1. Run the update for Kaspersky Internet Security 2016.
  2. When the update is completed, restart your computer.
  3. Upon restart, open Kaspersky Internet Security 2016.
  4. In the lower part of the window, click the Support link.
  5. If the patch has been installed successfully, the letter a will be added to the product version number.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Enju

jamescv7

Level 61
Verified
Trusted
> Which one can you use with Sandboxie?
> Which one will micro/macro viruses?
> Which one stop scripts?
> Which one stop worms?

Something to think about!;)
For Sandboxie seems that question is already answered with the link you posted on a thread in Avira. ;)

forums.sandboxie.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=21539

The other questions may surely answer by @cruelsister since she test those scripts and other mitigations which most AV's fail to protect under those circumstances. ;)
 

Tony Cole

Level 27
Does this patch fix the issues with Windows 10, or is it just the same - kind of odd, I cannot find anything of substance on their forums, only that MR1 is soon to start the beta phase. Does that mean Kaspersky users running Windows 10 will have to await that release before adequate protection is offered?
 

nsm0220

Level 21
Verified
BitDefender for sure because KIS is known to be a ram hog and their scans take forever to scan 60 files that are under 20 MBs.
 

Enju

New Member
That's true but even on Bitdefender's Official Site in the system requirements Windows 10 is included.
Just because they say it runs, doesn't mean it is optimized... IDS isn't working on x64 with BD 2015, there is no AMSI support too...

Does this patch fix the issues with Windows 10, or is it just the same - kind of odd, I cannot find anything of substance on their forums, only that MR1 is soon to start the beta phase. Does that mean Kaspersky users running Windows 10 will have to await that release before adequate protection is offered?
Protection is working fine, the only things not really working are the custom application rules (which are not needed in 99,99%) and the interface self protection, RAM cleanup and rollback don't really matter since an infected machine has to be formated anyways.
However MR1 should fix those issues. :)

BitDefender for sure because KIS is known to be a ram hog and their scans take forever to scan 60 files that are under 20 MBs.
"RAM hog" RAM is there to be used, Bitdefender for example uses over 250MB on a 16GB machine, KIS under 95. :rolleyes:
 

Lukajlo

Level 2
Verified
Just because they say it runs, doesn't mean it is optimized... IDS isn't working on x64 with BD 2015, there is no AMSI support too...
Every, and I mean EVERY AV tests says that they are very very close, on some of tests BiDefender is better on some Kaspersky but the difference is very small and you sound like KIS is waaaay better. Please think twice before you post next time. ;)
 

Enju

New Member
Every, and I mean EVERY AV tests says that they are very very close, on some of tests BiDefender is better on some Kaspersky but the difference is very small and you sound like KIS is waaaay better. Please think twice before you post next time. ;)
Did I state otherwise? Please read and understand first, then reply! :rolleyes:
I said BD doesn't have IDS on 64bit and no AMSI support, not that it has better or worse protection than Kaspersky...
 

Lukajlo

Level 2
Verified
I dont know why they have such problems, I dont have it, I run Windows 10 x64 and everything is ok, maybe they fix that so I think that limitation is for some users only
 

Enju

New Member
I dont know why they have such problems, I dont have it, I run Windows 10 x64 and everything is ok, maybe they fix that so I think that limitation is for some users only
No, Patchguard prohibits software from patching the kernel on x64 so it applies to every x64 user. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tony Cole

Tony Cole

Level 27
I was going to say, I truly believe Kaspersky wouldn't fix such limitations on a few systems, and leave the rest as they currently stand. I am mad; as the tech support guy said this patch would fix all the limitation issues.
 

Lukajlo

Level 2
Verified
No, Patchguard prohibits software from patching the kernel on x64 so it applies to every x64 user. :)
I am not sure about it because Intrusion Detection System is on Medium since I instal BD (Its on Permissive by default)
 

Enju

New Member
I am not sure about it because Intrusion Detection System is on Medium since I instal BD (Its on Permissive by default)
I will repeat myself one last time for you: It's there but it is extremely limited on x64 to the point of being literally useless, you can crank it up to max settings and you won't get any popups while on x86 you will... (with exactly the same testfile), this is because of Patchguard on x64 which (theoretically) prevents the patching and/or hooking of the Windows kernel.
 

Cch123

Level 7
Verified
@Enju is right that all AVs face severe constraints on x64 machines due to patch guard. Some AVs reveal the limitations, some don't. It would appear that all settings work, yes, but under the hood there are differences.

Fixing such limitations is extremely hard btw. The current approach taken by most AVs I monitor seem to be the use of hypervisors. For instance, Kaspersky uses a hypervisor module to block webcam captures and filter syscalls on x64 machines. However, not all machines have hardware virtualisation support, thus, some would not be able to enjoy this hypervisor protection. It would be irresponsible for vendors to report that these limitations are "solved" by hypervisors as some people are not able to enjoy its benefits. Also, hypervisor support is extremely hard as you would have to use different routines for AMD and Intel systems etc. while trying to make sure there are no incompatibilities and BSODs.
 

Lukajlo

Level 2
Verified
I will repeat myself one last time for you: It's there but it is extremely limited on x64 to the point of being literally useless, you can crank it up to max settings and you won't get any popups while on x86 you will... (with exactly the same testfile), this is because of Patchguard on x64 which (theoretically) prevents the patching and/or hooking of the Windows kernel.
So what you want to say that I am almost unprotected now?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.