Battle Eset Internet Security vs F-Secure Safe vs. G Data Internet Security

[Chausko]

Hello,
What would be your choice? I like these 3 AV because they don't have bloatware (vpn, tuneup and more).

I read on this forum, that F-Secure make a lot of improvements. It's worth it?

Thanks.

 

[Nevi]

I would go for Eset. Mostly because I have so good experience with it, and I really like so much you can tweak it.
F Secure should be a good encounter too.
I have no experience with G Data.

 

[Minimalist]

I would choose Eset - light on resources, good protection and good with FPs.

 

[SeriousHoax]

I would choose ESET. Lighter than G-Data in every department, more features than F-Secure. Less false positives, more tweak-ability and overall a more complete suite.

 

[ForgottenSeer 89360]

To answer this question we need to know how user behaves.

GData would be ideal for users looking for very high security, as it uses Bitdefender engine + proprietary engine (CloseGap if I am not mistaken) + behavioural blocker that really worked on my tests.
These will usually be users involved in risky behaviour.

F-Secure is for people who don’t need security that high, but they care about performance and lack of interruptions.
These will usually be users who know they do.

ESET is in between these two as a balanced approach, combining both performance and security (low-level web blocker, HIPS, effective static scanner).
This is for both types of users.

I personally, would go for the balanced approach.

 

[Cortex]

G-Data when I've used it seems clunky, with a complex Firewall, if at this time I was looking for suite I like it would no longer be ESET - One of ESET's great points was it's lightness, now I feel others have caught up with better protection - Using F-Secure at the moment on this & other half's lappy & impressed, if I wasn't using that it would be K

 

[omidomi]

F-Secure Safe for sure, Good detection, Great BB , Good Web blocking,Respect users privacy....
Eset BB is awful.
G-Data same as F-Secure btw its a bit heavier, may be For its BugDefneder Engine

 

[upnorth]

Transparency and openness/honesty with the public and customers, is in my view extremely important. No company or their product/s are 100% fail safe or bullet proof. When ever that's mentioned/stated/claimed, it's just pure marketing or a sad fanboi/troll that don't understand better. Lack of role models or age? Probably both. Misinformation or joke is one thing and we all do from time to time, but pure genuine desinformation is something I urge members here on MT to please report. It's obviously not allowed.

I like these 3 AV because they don't have bloatware (vpn, tuneup and more).

F-Secure does offer and have their own VPN, but just not sure I personal would consider it as bloatware. It does come as stand alone or also included in the TOTAL package/version. Even there it's possible to ignore install if for any reasons not wanted.

 

[ForgottenSeer 89360]

Transparency and openness/honesty with the public and customers, is in my view extremely important. No company or their product/s are 100% fail safe or bullet proof. When ever that's mentioned/stated/claimed, it's just pure marketing or a sad fanboi/troll that don't understand better. Lack of role models or age? Probably both. Misinformation or joke is one thing and we all do from time to time, but pure genuine desinformation is something I urge members here on MT to please report. It's obviously not allowed.


F-Secure does offer and have their own VPN, but just not sure I personal would consider it as bloatware. It does come as stand alone or also included in the TOTAL package/version. Even there it's possible to ignore install if for any reasons not wanted.

But who posted misinforming post here?

 

[Divine_Barakah]

Personally, I would go with G Data. It is light, though not the lightest, and offers decent protection. Eset is great but is too expensive for me. I have a licesne for F-Secure Safe with over 800 days left and I do not use it on any of my devices now. There is nothing wrong with F-Secure but two points: one I hate that it does not have a firewall and I need to deal with clumsy Windows Firewall notification about allowing Opera to connect in private and public networks for example. Second, being able to terminate F-Secure using task manager drives me crazy. Why the hell after all this long time they left their processes unprotected. Also there is no option to protect the settings (even if they are limited in number) with a password.

 

[SeriousHoax]

being able to terminate F-Secure using task manager drives me crazy. Why the hell after all this long time they left their processes unprotected.

What? Really!!!
Edit: I searched online and looks like only the UI can be terminated from task manager but protection still remains active. But have to say this is really bad from F-Secure. Even though it's just the UI, the ability to terminate it from task manager is not acceptable for a security software. It would drive me crazy too if I was a F-Secure user. Now no one should come and defend this btw. There's nothing to defend here I think.
Anyway, pardon me if I'm wrong about the info as I'm telling it from a google search result and haven't tested this personally. In that case feel free to correct me.

 

[MacDefender]

What? Really!!!
Edit: I searched online and looks like only the UI can be terminated from task manager but protection still remains active. But have to say this is really bad from F-Secure. Even though it's just the UI, the ability to terminate it from task manager is not acceptable for a security software. It would drive me crazy too if I was a F-Secure user. Now no one should come and defend this btw. There's nothing to defend here I think.
Anyway, pardon me if I'm wrong about the info as I'm telling it from a google search result and haven't tested this personally. In that case feel free to correct me.

You can kill the UI from Task Manager, you can also kill some of the services via a batch file and stop the protection. I'm kind of bewildered too that they allow this.

FWIW if you try this from PowerShell or an executable, it will trigger a DeepGuard detection. I would also feel safer if they protected their processes from being terminated, similar to most other AVs. Even if it just kills the UI, the UI is very important for delivering alerts about ongoing infection events.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

Hi my fri

What? Really!!!
Edit: I searched online and looks like only the UI can be terminated from task manager but protection still remains active. But have to say this is really bad from F-Secure. Even though it's just the UI, the ability to terminate it from task manager is not acceptable for a security software. It would drive me crazy too if I was a F-Secure user. Now no one should come and defend this btw. There's nothing to defend here I think.
Anyway, pardon me if I'm wrong about the info as I'm telling it from a google search result and haven't tested this personally. In that case feel free to correct me.

Hi my friend. I was able to terminate most of the processes and after a minute I got a warning from F-Secure that protection module failed and I need to contact support or sth.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

Firewall is only marketing nowadays

You might be right her but WF is no way usable and easy to use such as the firewall that comes with Norton for example. I am not talking about protection level but rather about usability. Some users suggest using Simplewall and Tinywall but that’s not an option for me. Their suggestion asserts my point that WF is not user friendly.

you "should" be able to terminate the process of any software on your computer IF you are with Admin user account.

Well, this is not convincing tbh. Each process should be well protected because if the suite cannot protect itself, then how is it supposed to protect me. I believe F-Secure is a capable company and they can fix this.

 

[Venustus]

Out of the three and I've used them all....F Secure..Deepguard is very powerful..!

 

[upnorth]

But who posted misinforming post here?

I thought that was more then understood from the visible quote of a member name including the specific statement and also a reply where I tried to help explain the possible " bloatware " misinformation or did you still somehow for some reason not understand what I posted?

Crystal clear misinformation or borderline towards desinformation or as I said, true genuine desinformation is not allowed and we in the staff here on MT rarely talk in the open when that actually happen, as the one doing it will 100% for sure notice it in one way or the other. This specific case is very solved and was one of those times when it's obvious it's a very minor misinformation post. Not even questioned/replied from the one that was quoted, except for a like so I would assume and hope the message worked as intended. I also see now I need to try help a bit more and I will, as misinformation mostly comes from lack of knowledge.

 

[Cortex]

I don't think it was me as I think i was in hospital

 

[upnorth]

being able to terminate F-Secure using task manager drives me crazy. Why the hell after all this long time they left their processes unprotected. Also there is no option to protect the settings (even if they are limited in number) with a password.

I actually partially agree with this, but it's also not entirely true! It's 1 specific service that would need a bit of tweaking, but more of that a bit down in this post.

When you turn off All security features through the UI, the F-Secure Ultralight Hoster is stopped. All security features are linked to that service.

If F-Secure Hoster is stopped the security features are still on but the user interface will disappear and no action prompts will be visible. So the computer is still protected but you cannot control it in any way.

F-Secure Ultralight ORSP Client controls the Object Reputation Service Protocol, which is connected to the security cloud feature: Security Cloud privacy policy | F-Secure

Which F-Secure windows services should be monitored and running all the time? - F-Secure Community

Issue: Which F-Secure windows services should be monitored and running all the time to verify that the protection is on? Resolution: F-Secure Client Security 14.x, Server Security 14.x, PSB Computer Protection and PSB Server Protection are all OneClient based products so they all have the same...

community.f-secure.com

Even when using the administrator account, some services is not possible to " terminate " via the task manager, so 100% terminate or kill F-Secure via the task manager is for sure wrong. Also hopefully understood from F-Secures own statement that I included in the quote. Anyone with F-Secure installed on their system can test this, and after a few minutes F-Secure will even prompt/show a message that the system needs a reboot, because all services are not up and running as they should. If one ignore also that for whatever reason, the issue probably lays elsewhere then with the actual software.

The part I agree with and that F-Secure should restrict IMO, is the service ORSP ( Object Reputation Service Protocol ). Consider it's a pretty important part, it's today a bit too easy and should be a risk of abuse. Then on the other hand, I personal never actually witnessed/seen any malware or attack that alone used that as a vector.

If one is a F-Secure customer/user there is a very easy solution to this. SUA ( standard user account ). Personal I'm on that 24/7.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

Also hopefully understood from F-Secures own statement

Well if they are aware of it, why did not they play safe and tweak it to be protected?

f one is a F-Secure customer/user there is a very easy solution to this. SUA ( standard user account ). Personal I'm on that 24/7.

Well this is very inconvenient. It does not make sense to sacrifice convenience for F-Secure shortcoming.

 

[upnorth]

Well if they are aware of it, why did not they play safe and tweak it to be protected?

Well this is very inconvenient. It does not make sense to sacrifice convenience for F-Secure shortcoming.

That is a question I can't help you with more then I already tried. You simply have to reach out and try ask them directly. That's my best advice.

What type of convenience exactly is it that you or anyone else sacrifice by using a SUA?