Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SearchLight" data-source="post: 823726" data-attributes="member: 63857">Everyone here makes a valid point regarding the potential risk of being infected and better to be safe than sorry. That said, much has been said about using the lightest av possible. So I will ask the question every body might be thinking: from experience, what light AV would one recommend to provide the &quot;safe&quot; factor?KIS and KAF have been widely recommended by some but it has so many components that need to be tweaked that the average user might be baffled as what to set. I myself tried using them but then found my browsing slowed because Kaspersky injects scripts into its browser monitoring. I had to uncheck the feature to speed things up. My point being is that if one starts unchecking various components that are designed for protection for the purpose of speed or using less RAM, then it defeats the purpose of having that specific AV in the first place.It seems like we now have come full circle to to using Windows Defender again, which everyone originally seemed to hate<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite109" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> From what I have been reading by others, it sounds like if one uses Windows Defender supplemented by something like VS and/or OSA, and follows good internet habits, one should be good to go. You don&#039;t need all the bloat. Agree?Of course if anyone finds that there security solution works for them, by all means continue to use it.Btw, if there are any CF/cs devotees who might be offended by my suggestion, no offense intended. I know many here feel that Comodo Firewall tweaked is all that one really needs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SearchLight, post: 823726, member: 63857"] Everyone here makes a valid point regarding the potential risk of being infected and better to be safe than sorry. That said, much has been said about using the lightest av possible. So I will ask the question every body might be thinking: from experience, what light AV would one recommend to provide the "safe" factor? KIS and KAF have been widely recommended by some but it has so many components that need to be tweaked that the average user might be baffled as what to set. I myself tried using them but then found my browsing slowed because Kaspersky injects scripts into its browser monitoring. I had to uncheck the feature to speed things up. My point being is that if one starts unchecking various components that are designed for protection for the purpose of speed or using less RAM, then it defeats the purpose of having that specific AV in the first place. It seems like we now have come full circle to to using Windows Defender again, which everyone originally seemed to hate:) From what I have been reading by others, it sounds like if one uses Windows Defender supplemented by something like VS and/or OSA, and follows good internet habits, one should be good to go. You don't need all the bloat. Agree? Of course if anyone finds that there security solution works for them, by all means continue to use it. Btw, if there are any CF/cs devotees who might be offended by my suggestion, no offense intended. I know many here feel that Comodo Firewall tweaked is all that one really needs. [/QUOTE]

Verification