App Review ESET Internet Security 2019 Review

[Brie]

Leo gets money to promote bitdefender. what other AV's is Leo paid to promote?

windows defender is a lot heavier on my PC than bitdefender.

 

[RoboMan]

I mean... If a software offers you anti ransomware protection, HIPS module, interactive firewall, boot and memory protection, UEFI protection... and you use it at default settings... You don't particularly have the right to claim it's a bad software lol

 

[Azure]

Eset is a second-level antivirus, the only good point is that it is lightweight, but lightness will not protect you against attacks

What about...
ETERNALBLUE vs Internet Security Suites and nextgen protections - MRG Effitas

 

[erreale]

I mean... If a software offers you anti ransomware protection, HIPS module, interactive firewall, boot and memory protection, UEFI protection... and you use it at default settings... You don't particularly have the right to claim it's a bad software lol

A software must be tested with its default configuration and it would not make much sense to run the same test under other conditions, as not all users would be able to modify its setup. Even Windows, if configured, would be a better SO, but we complain to Microsoft because it should make it better by default. Where is the difference?

 

[Burrito]

I'm not going to bash Leo's testing... there is enough mindless test bashing around here.

But... one should consider the actual pros in the field before drawing any sort of real conclusion.

Here are three A finishes for Eset from SE Labs:
SE Labs

Here's a C finish from AV-C.
Real-World Protection Test October 2018 – Factsheet | AV-Comparatives

While Eset is not my choice, I think it's a viable capability.

 

[Nightwalker]

ESET is a complete antivirus solution with above average technical quality and it has one of the most balanced default settings.

Sure, you can tweak its HIPS and Firewall, but it isnt necessary, it is perfect fine by itself and by default.

 

[outlawxtorn]

ESET will protect the average user just fine. Pairing it with VS gives you a strong lightweight solution. However, most average users don't know about VS. Maybe ESET could add VS as an optional install someday, that would be neat.

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

ESET is a complete antivirus solution with above average technical quality and it has one of the most balanced default settings.

I agree wholeheartedly.

I can for the most part say the same for the majority of security suites out there (Norton, F-secure, Kaspersky, etc...) as well. The problem IMHO is that everytime there's a test, people make the passing mark 99-100% and that if it's less than that, it's a piece of crap. Eset failed this test, but it's just one test, but people write it off like it's garbage. Every single product will fail, no product is perfect 100% of the time. Just because a product may fail a test, or let in even 1 piece of malware, doesn't mean it can't do it's job when looking at the bigger picture (ie: the real-world). These test do not represnt the real-world, nor do they represent how people use their computers. It's fine and dandy to test products, I'm all for testing, but if all you are looking for is a product that is 100% all the time, you will never find it. It's always imperative to use any product with safe practices. I can look at any product and find a test where it failed, but it doesn't mean it's a piece of crap.

At the end of the day every program has their pros and cons, no product is perfect and it's imperative that people just find a product that suites their needs and not stress over every little test. Just because a product may fail a test, doesn't mean you instantly became infected. I constantly read comments from people all over the internet saying they used x, y or z product and have been infection free for a very long time. To me it means that overall, the vast majority of products seem to be doing their job quite well, despite what a test may say, this includes Eset. This is the difference between drag racing tests and the real-world.

Eset has a lot of capabilities at it's disposal, it's more than capable at default, but can also become very strong if you tweak it and take advantage of HIPS, etc... There's more than one way to do things, Eset has designed their products and it's features to how they feel is best. HIPS is just another way of being able to lock down a computer, you may have to tweak it, but the capability is there and that's just one of many other capabilities that Eset has. If you don't like to tweak or don't want to spend time with HIPS, that's more than fine, Eset isn't for you, but then again no product fits everyone's needs. I'll reiterate, pick which ever product fits your needs the most and practice safe habits. Remember there is more than one way to tackle security and the different features within the various products reflect this.

 

[DeepWeb]

Eh. As usual, never be a fanboy of one anti-malware product. I had Eset when it was great, then I had Emsisoft when it was great, now I'm on Kaspersky. One year, one product is better another year another product is better. Always be on your feet and switch to the best product that works for your demands.

Also disagree with the idea that you are expected to configure your AV. You are buying an antivirus. The default configuration should be the optimal configuration between security and performance. The default config is what the vendor decided to be secure and you trust that vendor. This result is bad, there's no excuse. But they'll probably be better next year or even next month.

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

Eh. As usual, never be a fanboy of one anti-malware product. I had Eset when it was great, then I had Emsisoft when it was great, now I'm on Kaspersky. One year, one product is better another year another product is better. Always be on your feet and switch to the best product that works for your demands.

Also disagree with the idea that you are expected to configure your AV. You are buying an antivirus. The default configuration should be the optimal configuration between security and performance. The default config is what the vendor decided to be secure and you trust that vendor. This result is bad, there's no excuse. But they'll probably be better next year or even next month.

I agree.

I just want to clarify that I don't think you should have to configure your product default should work fine, but sometimes its nice to have that ability if you like it. Like I've always said, test each product for yourself and use the one that fits your needs. Eset overall is a good program, but it wont fit everyone's needs.

You bring up a good point, every product has their up's and down's. Norton use to be a huge piece of crap a long time ago, but they have since turned it around and its now a very capable product. The same can be said for any product. The problem I have is when people over react and go "that's it I'm uninstalling this product, it failed a test, need a new program." Month's later (another test), "My new program failed this test, time to uninstall this new one and get a new, new one." Meanwhile the program they had before was serving their needs and was still keeping them protected as they were malware free.

 

[oldschool]

Eh. As usual, never be a fanboy of one anti-malware product... ... now I'm on Kaspersky. One year, one product is better another year another product is better. ...

Isn't "everyone" using Kaspersky now? LOL I have no experience with ESET but I agree with all of your points, @Raiden's as well. It's one test! Big deal.

 

[DeepWeb]

Isn't "everyone" using Kaspersky now? LOL I have no experience with ESET but I agree with all of your points, @Raiden's as well. It's one test! Big deal.

The general consensus is Kaspersky is cool now. When I joined MT last year everyone was talking about how great Emsisoft was. We are a caravan

 

[Evjl's Rain]

a great AV should perform well in almost all testing conditions so there should be no excuses

I think his testing method is okay but it's doesn't fairly compare between different products due to different samples
ESET in default settings heavily and almost solely depends on its signatures without true behavior blocker. Tweaking ESET is a different story because HIPS is supposed to block everything including newly installed safe programs

for example, I don't recommend kaspersky for my friends if I don't set it up by my hands because in default settings, kaspersky is useless against PUPs, I repeat, useless
Kaspersky classify PUPs in "not-a-virus" category so PUP detection must be enabled

I have seen many PCs protected by KIS, heavily infected by PUPs and chinese softwares although KIS fully protected them against more damaging types of malware

 

[mlnevese]

I have never seem any security product that will offer their maximum protection without tweaking settings. I also have never seem any security software that does not have problems. I currently own licenses for Kaspersky, Bitdefender and ESET and think they all offer great protection and they all have their problems. Let me give an example of some of the problems I had with them...

Kaspersky doesn't like some of the government sites I have to visit for my work and keeps blocking them even after I whitelisted the sites. It also had over 20+ warnings in the website of a hotel I was planning to visit. The site comes clean from online analysis and other security software. I actually had to stop Kaspersky on that machine to enter that hotel website and make my reservations.

Bitdefender forced me to restore my Calibre (ebook management) database because it blocked access making Calibre rebuild the database from scratch and, in the process, making me lose all the notes I had on different books. Thank heavens for imaging software.

ESET forced me to exclude my wireless printers software and IPs from monitoring manually to stop printing and scanning failures.

Before someone asks me they are installed on different machines I plan to unify all my personal and work machines as well as my family's computers under a single solution eventually

 

[Huchim]

I like ESET only because is light, since the V8 until V11 it wasn't capable to detect USB malware here in my country, always infected. the V11 finally detect it but Kaspersky has always protected my pc's since 2012 and never get infected and I've tried a lot of AV but always I return to Kaspersky,

The general consensus is Kaspersky is cool now. When I joined MT last year everyone was talking about how great Emsisoft was. We are a caravan

This year maybe because Kaspersky shows that rocks even in free version at MTHub

for example, I don't recommend kaspersky for my friends if I don't set it up by my hands because in default settings, kaspersky is useless against PUPs, I repeat, useless
Kaspersky classify PUPs in "not-a-virus" category so PUP detection must be enabled

I agree, and that's why the 2019 version is great, the PUP detection is enabled by default.

 

[harlan4096]

That's right, during install process now a window is presented to the user with some options, and there is PUP one ticked by default.

But be careful, because there is "an issue" with that -> if You run a Kaspersky reset settings, then that PUP option will be again disable and You'll have to enable manually

 

[Mahesh Sudula]

Kaspersky had always been a vendor who separate from the competition.
They rely on multiple technologies at many levels..And as the reason even 2 date the un disputed high quality vendor across all categories

 

[SumTingWong]

One problem I have with KIS 2019 is the VPN connection mode using IKEv2. Other than that, it is a great suite.

It is 2 months now, and Kaspersky level 2 support doesnt have the resolution for it.

 

[Cortex]

I know a few people who use AV solutions but expect it to just work, some of those use ESET - ESET as far as I am aware on their buy ESET page it doesn't say needs tweaking to protect properly & the Ransomware module don't work until the users tweak it. They are never going to tweak it. If ESET & others don't protect users out of the box the AV company should make it clear. Most users of AV's don't know one end from the other, never will & don't want or feel they should learn.

 

[Nightwalker]

I know a few people who use AV solutions but expect it to just work, some of those use ESET - ESET as far as I am aware on their buy ESET page it doesn't say needs tweaking to protect properly & the Ransomware module don't work until the users tweak it. They are never going to tweak it. If ESET & others don't protect users out of the box the AV company should make it clear. Most users of AV's don't know one end from the other, never will & don't want or feel they should learn.

ESET does protect against Ransomware by default and it is actually very good doing so.

When was the last time that you used ESET? Because the user cant tweak the Ransomware module (Ransomware Shield) ...

ESET is very good at default settings, it will offer good protection with low false positives and user input; I only wish to have a option to enable those HIPS settings below by just ticking a box.

Configure HIPS rules for ESET business products to protect against ransomware

Ps: I am not shilling for ESET, I just dont like to see misformation and subjective opinions posing as facts.
Ps 2: I am actually using KIS 2019 ...