What would you choose to protect a family PC?

  • Bullguard Internet Security

  • Emsisoft Anti-Malware

Results are only viewable after voting.
Software to Compare
Bullguard Internet Securitt
Emsisoft
Compare
Ease of use
Impact on hardware performance
Core protection (AV engine, Heuristic engine)
Internet protection (Web filtering, Anti-Phishing, Antispam, Browser extension)
Proactive protection (Behavior blocker, HIPS, Sandbox)
Network protection (Firewall, Botnet protection)
Ransomware protection
Banking & Payments protection
Most Features

valvaris

Level 3
Verified
@Seyyed Akram

About that shown as a screenshot (quite huge :p ) is a fraud check that happens sometimes. You can get in touch with Emsisoft support to get it fixed asap. (sales{at}emsisoft.com) -> Send us an email

@XLR8R

Suites are suites in that case an AiO solution - More Bloatware then AV for my taste. It may be super easy to use but consider that on a modern system like Windows 10 Pro you end up not needing a single one except for an AV alternative if needed. (If Windows Defender is not sufficient for you...)

In the end of the day it is the choice of OP and with what you feel more comfortable with. In terms of cost that is in relation to how important you think your data is and if the protection provided is sufficient. From my PoV is that the first line of defense should always be your router or better yet firewall/appliance. ^^ But that is a topic for another day :D

Sincerely
Val.
 

XLR8R

Level 3
@Seyyed Akram

About that shown as a screenshot (quite huge :p ) is a fraud check that happens sometimes. You can get in touch with Emsisoft support to get it fixed asap. (sales{at}emsisoft.com) -> Send us an email

@XLR8R

Suites are suites in that case an AiO solution - More Bloatware then AV for my taste. It may be super easy to use but consider that on a modern system like Windows 10 Pro you end up not needing a single one except for an AV alternative if needed. (If Windows Defender is not sufficient for you...)

In the end of the day it is the choice of OP and with what you feel more comfortable with. In terms of cost that is in relation to how important you think your data is and if the protection provided is sufficient. From my PoV is that the first line of defense should always be your router or better yet firewall/appliance. ^^ But that is a topic for another day :D

Sincerely
Val.
To be honest, what I have observed is that keeping Windows properly updated (even the programs) goes a long way towards not getting infected.

But I have observed many users who turn off the updates or delay it, finding it annoying or perceiving that such background update will hurt the performance of the system. Windows 10 makes it much better, but you can still stop it from updating.

For example, I work in an organization that still has computers on Windows 7 and 8.1, and many employees disable update functionality using various methods with the assumption that it boosts performance.

In such cases, security programs that pretty much silent install the critical security fixes (at least) are a godsend. I hence see where such features could come in handy for organizations and even consumers.

Of course, router/firewall is a good solution, but most home users and even SMB you find will go for the cheapest hardware available and not the best. Let's just say, the firmware and firewall configuration of certain Chinese routers and appliances can be very frustrating....

P. S. BullGuard's game booster does work - you need at least 4 logical cores and a GPU more powerful than the CPU can handle to see the difference.... :D
 

valvaris

Level 3
Verified
To be honest, what I have observed is that keeping Windows properly updated (even the programs) goes a long way towards not getting infected.

But I have observed many users who turn off the updates or delay it, finding it annoying or perceiving that such background update will hurt the performance of the system. Windows 10 makes it much better, but you can still stop it from updating.

For example, I work in an organization that still has computers on Windows 7 and 8.1, and many employees disable update functionality using various methods with the assumption that it boosts performance.

In such cases, security programs that pretty much silent install the critical security fixes (at least) are a godsend. I hence see where such features could come in handy for organizations and even consumers.

Of course, router/firewall is a good solution, but most home users and even SMB you find will go for the cheapest hardware available and not the best. Let's just say, the firmware and firewall configuration of certain Chinese routers and appliances can be very frustrating....

P. S. BullGuard's game booster does work - you need at least 4 logical cores and a GPU more powerful than the CPU can handle to see the difference.... :D
I try to keep it short and have to apologize if I sound arrogant or even out right disrespectful. - It is not meant as such that is why SORRY in advance!

About the Windows 7 and Win 8.1 Systems in a corp. environment ill call it bad administration - Why? - If you have them joined in a Windows Domain (Active Directory) and update your global catalog to the build versions needed you should be able to prevent such settings to be changed! Update properly with reports from your WSUS and even use build-in methods to enforce it.

To bring in Ent., Corp. SMB or mybe KMU is not wise since those are Commercial Use cases and have (Region based) laws or not that need to be fulfilled or not... As an example: In Germany you have to make sure that you use the most advanced tech. available and affordable to make a breach as complicated as it can be. (The State provides a "like a coupon" if you purchase new things "Firewalls and so on for SMBs") GDPR / DSGVO

If a function works or not is not the matter - I just mentioned that in my case and for my taste - I see it as bloatware. ;) That is the reason why I am here too - learn things keep an open mind - Best way for me I noticed use Build-In as much as possible and you save allot more money... ^^

Best regards
Val.
 
F

ForgottenSeer 823865

F

ForgottenSeer 823865

If you only consider only for malware detection then both are dependent on bitdefender signature based engine.
Not exactly true, Emsi house engine is more focused on 0-days while BD is more about already detected and prevalent malware, when BD update its database to include signatures previously covered by Emsi engine, those signature doublons are cleaned up from Emsi DB.
 

XLR8R

Level 3
vulvaris said:
About the Windows 7 and Win 8.1 Systems in a corp. environment ill call it bad administration - Why? - If you have them joined in a Windows Domain (Active Directory) and update your global catalog to the build versions needed you should be able to prevent such settings to be changed! Update properly with reports from your WSUS and even use build-in methods to enforce it.
True, but I am not the IT admin and I do not have a degree in IT/Computer Science so I can't take that role. :D

vulvaris said:
(The State provides a "like a coupon" if you purchase new things "Firewalls and so on for SMBs") GDPR / DSGVO
Several countries, still not so serious about data protection or still only starting these discussions. Many organizations, still don't know or care about rules. They do what they please until something bad happens....

vulvaris said:
Best way for me I noticed use Build-In as much as possible and you save allot more money...
True. But one has to look at merits as well as demerits. I am not a big fan of Windows Defender, for example, because it loses a large part of it's efficacy without proper internet access. I have seen one too many infected thumb drive and internal network transferred files including wifi/bluetooth etc. to make me comfortable that something is going to work right when there's no internet (after all, you can have an outage for 10 minutes and that's enough).

OTOH, Windows Firewall configured right is VERY good IMHO....
 

The Cog in the Machine

Level 21
Verified
Pricing is a very important factor for me. Anyway, I have reinstalled Bullguard and raised the protection bar to Maximum. Protected Bullguard's settings with Bullguard Account password (very important because family members tend to exclude infected files). The Secure Browser and Game Booster are good additions. Most importantly, Bullguard is much lighter than Emsisoft. No browser extension required and no startup delay. I am pretty sure Emsisoft would offer slightly better protection but that would never mean Bullguard is weak. We're at home and not at a financial institution targeted by hackers and whatsoever. All PCs are backed up to external hdds on a weekly basis and important files are synced to One Drive.

Good offer.:)
The seller sent photos of Newegg cards. Activated successfully and the price is unbeatable.
 
F

ForgottenSeer 823865

That is true, because no av vendor one wants to overload their software with malware database and in turn slow down user system. Well, but in some cases where i have noted after downlading around 5,00,000 from both virushshare.com & virussign.com and testing them in VM just for a sake of testing many other av too, it has been seen (in this case between emsisoft & bitdefender) even if the bitdefender detects a particular sample , and emsisoft also detects it, then it is totally upto emsisoft whether they want to use the detection name of their own or bitdefender, but in most cases they have used bitdefenders name only.
You know, you don't have to explain me about how Emsisoft manage their database. I was an Emsisoft employee.
I explained earlier, if a signature is common to both engines, the BD engine will keep it and the Emsi engine will be cleaned.
 

The Cog in the Machine

Level 21
Verified
Anyone
You know, you don't have to explain me about how Emsisoft manage their database. I was an Emsisoft employee.
I explained earlier, if a signature is common to both engines, the BD engine will keep it and the Emsi engine will be cleaned.
But why Emsisoft drops their own detection and just user BD's detection name? I am not experienced in that regard but does not Emsisoft have complete control over BD detection? I mean they could possibly not include the Bitdefender detection and just keep their own? Do Emsisoft detections have generic names like Bitdefender's? I know that Emsisoft's engine is focused on specifically Pups but why do not they focus more on their engine and possibly eventually dropping Bitdefender's engine and relying %100 on their own engine?
 
F

ForgottenSeer 823865

First I need to precise, I was Community m
Manager, and not working in the dev or malware research department, and it was few years ago so I may forget or can't reveal some technical details.

1-But, why Emsisoft drops their own detection and just user BD's detection name?
2-I am not experienced in that regard but does not Emsisoft have complete control over BD detection? I mean they could possibly not include the Bitdefender detection and just keep their own?
3- Do Emsisoft detections have generic names like Bitdefender's? I know that Emsisoft's engine is focused on specifically Pups but why do not they focus more on their engine and possibly eventually dropping Bitdefender's engine and relying %100 on their own engine?
1- to lighten the footprint.
2- would be less practical and convenient. I can't tell too much details.
3- you can see which engine detect a malware via the letter A for Emsi, B for BD.
Remember Emsi is not a giant, they don't possess the resources, infrastructure and personel to create and maintain a full house engine.
Emsisoft engine focuses on PUP and zero-days, since emsi doesn't use BD cloud, they can't just wait for BD to release their signatures updates.


Thanks for the info, I respect your words, I will privately message you the sample or the VT link and then let me know if both emsi and bitdefender detect the sample, then why did emsisoft still kept its name instead of bitdefender. I think you being an ex employee of emsisoft will be able to provide correct information regarding that.
I'm not the right one to ask this, I wasn't on the dev team. However their support forum is better suited to answer you. It could be the Emsi DB wasn't t cleaned up yet, or the malware slightly different despite being on the same family.
You have to know that one signature can be made from multiple malware. This is how vendors reduce the size of their DB, if not, it would take Gigas instead of Megas
 

XLR8R

Level 3
Pricing is a very important factor for me. Anyway, I have reinstalled Bullguard and raised the protection bar to Maximum. Protected Bullguard's settings with Bullguard Account password (very important because family members tend to exclude infected files). The Secure Browser and Game Booster are good additions. Most importantly, Bullguard is much lighter than Emsisoft. No browser extension required and no startup delay. I am pretty sure Emsisoft would offer slightly better protection but that would never mean Bullguard is weak. We're at home and not at a financial institution targeted by hackers and whatsoever. All PCs are backed up to external hdds on a weekly basis and important files are synced to One Drive.


The seller sent photos of Newegg cards. Activated successfully and the price is unbeatable.
I wouldn't worry. BullGuard has always been decent for as long as I can remember. The only qualm is that it's never been the absolute best, but more than good enough for the vast majority.

However, given how cheap the licenses can be, and that BullGuard actually encourages customers to buy license from whichever source gives them the best possible deal, I have to believe BullGuard can be incredible value, especially considering some shenanigans by certain vendors that I can't name here, including measures like restricting license extensions/renewals to licenses brought from the same reseller/distributor, country-specific license codes, less/no provision for renewal using retail box/store bought new license, region-specific pricing, etc.
 

XLR8R

Level 3
Anyone


But why Emsisoft drops their own detection and just user BD's detection name? I am not experienced in that regard but does not Emsisoft have complete control over BD detection? I mean they could possibly not include the Bitdefender detection and just keep their own? Do Emsisoft detections have generic names like Bitdefender's? I know that Emsisoft's engine is focused on specifically Pups but why do not they focus more on their engine and possibly eventually dropping Bitdefender's engine and relying %100 on their own engine?
BitDefender SDK comes with complete engine along with set of databases. Technically you can exclude certain detections but then you'd have to maintain a database of what detections are to be excluded from BitDefender. This is not practical or convenient. In any case, most of the BitDefender licensees send their samples to BitDefender for adding signatures. The BD engine is thus a very comprehensive and good signature detection engine.

To optimize the performance and memory footprint, it is better as a developer to simply remove detections from an engine you know well and belongs to you (Emsi) than to tinker around in an OEM engine, which, you never know, may be affected by a future generic detection that will detect the threat anyway.

Emsisoft has very less employees compared to even BullGuard, and hardly has the resources or expertise (remember it's history as an Anti-Trojan developer) to sustain a full-fledged engine. This is why Emsisoft (like many other OEMs) has decided to use the BitDefender engine and supplement it with it's own engine and advanced proactive detection technologies. Many OEMs do not even take Emsisoft's route (for example: VIPRE and Total Defense are pretty much reskinned BitDefender SDK products as nearly all of the protection components except maybe the processes are implementations of BitDefender technology).
 
F

ForgottenSeer 823865

Emsisoft has very less employees compared to even BullGuard, and hardly has the resources or expertise (remember it's history as an Anti-Trojan developer) to sustain a full-fledged engine.
Not enough resources indeed, Expertise, they have it. The lead dev is among the best dev in the planet.
The guy hobby is to reverse ransomware to such a successful extent that his life is threatened by criminals.
Long time ago, he even bypassed a very popular security soft in less than 5mn and gave its dev a fix for free LOL.
So no, they don't lack expertise, just the cash.
 
Top