JiSingh12

Level 3
Currently on my Windows 10 Machine:
(I have not tested multiple configs like some people, so this combo is the first one i tried and just stuck to it)

1. Avast Free (Tweaked/Hardened)
2. OSArmor w/ Syshardener
3. Malwarebytes w/ Rootkit Scanning


4?. (Browser) Chrome with Netcraft, Nano, Canvas Defender, and Malwarebytes.
 
Last edited:

LDogg

Level 29
Verified
As it's only 3.

1. Forticlient w/ Windows Defender - AV, Anti-exploit & excellent web filter
2. Syshardener/HC/WD/CD - tweaked settings for further OS lockdown and reducing the attack surface
3. On demand scanners - once a week scans

Anything else

1. Firewall: CFW
2. Anti-exe: Voodooshield
3. Browser extensions: Netcraft, Scriptsafe + uBlock Origin

I don't do anything stupid, normal web habits so I don't see the reason to have a extensive security list as for me on my system would be overkill.

~LDogg
 

AtlBo

Level 27
Verified
Content Creator
Comodo Firewall-cruel sister + HIPS (Safe Mode)
FortiClient or KSC whichever seems more privacy correct to operator/pc owner
NVT OSArmor

Problem with Comodo is the naggy bugs. Updates can cause issues, because CF will continually add and readd Internet Security Essentials via updates, even if you remove ISE and/or decline to install it. ISE is a problem because it seems to be one cause of issues with system resource usage while Comodo is on the system. Logging is also something that can cause resource issues. Then there are the inexplicable crashes of CF that for me make it suspect to use. Could today's sophisticated malware crash CF? This question nags me. FortiClent's web filtering is 10,000x more valuable than anything in ISE, and this is probably also true of KSC too. Last, the CF sandbox is clumsy for browsing, unfortunately. This is another mild headache for me personally. All this said, CF is, the only program of its kind, offering connection controls and auto-sandboxing. HIPs is a plus but also a mess to use at times, in spite of run as installer option, etc. ReHIPs is an option here, but firewalling must be added if firewall controls are required. Also, there is a significant amount of user choice with ReHIPs. No TVL, no cloud, etc.

Hoping for improvement to CF at this point. For now, I can't quite see the point for running the program. Over 3 years, the headaches became more than I could deal with, given the controls also provide limited protection flexibility for a program with such a sophisticated protection scheme and scope. The vision is very good and OK in practice for now. Little disappointed that this is as good as I can feel about a platform with so much potential, however.

Is it me, or is the biggest part of this choice beginning to become trust? I may end up reinstalling Comodo, and I don't have a trust problem there. However, if I am in Europe, is FortiClient (USA product) going to seem secure to use? If I am in the U.S. is Kaspersky going to seem safe to use? I could get by with Qihoo for a long time, and I enjoyed that for about 5 years. Guess I would still be using the program if not for the horrendous lengths required to put back the ads. Avast seems to have become this way to me too. Overall, though, trust seems to me to be hard to come by at the present time. The EULAs seem to be getting greyer and greyer on data protection...
 

shmu26

Level 83
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Comodo Firewall-cruel sister + HIPS (Safe Mode)
FortiClient or KSC whichever seems more privacy correct to operator/pc owner
NVT OSArmor

Problem with Comodo is the naggy bugs. Updates can cause issues, because CF will continually add and readd Internet Security Essentials via updates, even if you remove ISE and/or decline to install it. ISE is a problem because it seems to be one cause of issues with system resource usage while Comodo is on the system. Logging is also something that can cause resource issues. Then there are the inexplicable crashes of CF that for me make it suspect to use. Could today's sophisticated malware crash CF? This question nags me. FortiClent's web filtering is 10,000x more valuable than anything in ISE, and this is probably also true of KSC too. Last, the CF sandbox is clumsy for browsing, unfortunately. This is another mild headache for me personally. All this said, CF is, the only program of its kind, offering connection controls and auto-sandboxing. HIPs is a plus but also a mess to use at times, in spite of run as installer option, etc. ReHIPs is an option here, but firewalling must be added if firewall controls are required. Also, there is a significant amount of user choice with ReHIPs. No TVL, no cloud, etc.

Hoping for improvement to CF at this point. For now, I can't quite see the point for running the program. Over 3 years, the headaches became more than I could deal with, given the controls also provide limited protection flexibility for a program with such a sophisticated protection scheme and scope. The vision is very good and OK in practice for now. Little disappointed that this is as good as I can feel about a platform with so much potential, however.

Is it me, or is the biggest part of this choice beginning to become trust? I may end up reinstalling Comodo, and I don't have a trust problem there. However, if I am in Europe, is FortiClient (USA product) going to seem secure to use? If I am in the U.S. is Kaspersky going to seem safe to use? I could get by with Qihoo for a long time, and I enjoyed that for about 5 years. Guess I would still be using the program if not for the horrendous lengths required to put back the ads. Avast seems to have become this way to me too. Overall, though, trust seems to me to be hard to come by at the present time. The EULAs seem to be getting greyer and greyer on data protection...
I am with you on the subject of Comodo. The vision is superb, but the implementation is not.

As for the trust issues vis a vis products from unfriendly countries, what are they going to find on my computer? Some wedding pictures?
If the Ruskies make a good product, I use it, just like if they make a good vodka, I drink it.
 
Last edited:

Der.Reisende

Level 40
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Malware Hunter
Realtime Protection:
Tencent PC Manager Global (custom settings)
Realtime protection mode: Expert mode (Prompt upon detecting suspect actions)
File system protection level: High (monitor all file operations)
Action on threat detection: Choose action manually
Download Protection: Security prompt on dangerous files only

Firewall:
Windows 10 OS one, enhanced by Windows 10 Firewall control (Free Version) in order to decide on non-OS processes trying to call out, before they actually can

VPN:
F-Secure FreeDome VPN, in AutoRuns, always on

(For on-demand checking on malware infections: NPE, Malwarebytes Premium, HMP, SysInternals AutoRuns and TCPView, MisterGroup System Explorer)
 

shmu26

Level 83
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Realtime Protection:
Tencent PC Manager Global (custom settings)
Realtime protection mode: Expert mode (Prompt upon detecting suspect actions)
File system protection level: High (monitor all file operations)
Action on threat detection: Choose action manually
Download Protection: Security prompt on dangerous files only

Firewall:
Windows 10 OS one, enhanced by Windows 10 Firewall control (Free Version) in order to decide on non-OS processes trying to call out, before they actually can

VPN:
F-Secure FreeDome VPN, in AutoRuns, always on

(For on-demand checking on malware infections: NPE, Malwarebytes Premium, HMP, SysInternals AutoRuns and TCPView, MisterGroup System Explorer)
Your custom settings for Tencent look really interesting.
How would you describe it? Does it function sort of like HIPS, or anti-exe, or what?
Is the script protection good?
 

Der.Reisende

Level 40
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Malware Hunter
Your custom settings for Tencent look really interesting.
How would you describe it? Does it function sort of like HIPS, or anti-exe, or what?
Is the script protection good?
No Anti-Exe.

It does have an behavior blocker, and maybe also uses HIPS (sometimes, I noticed QMHipsComServer.exe in TCPView).
1542184224372.png
I’ve yet to see any user input request (it autoblocks on detecting malicious actions), though you will get a notification window.
1542185938361.png

It clearly is not on the level of free AV Kaspersky, Avast,..., but I feel comfortable with that AV. Light, not bloated, Bitdefender signatures (not delayed like in Qihoo 360, it autoupdates the signatures multiple times a hour).
It does have its own signatures too, sometimes the cloud is really strong. The BB does Auto-SUD to it (optional setting).
It does also check malware / phishing pages without an extension, but does currently not work with Brave, Vivaldi and Edge browsers.

Scripts:
BB still does not block every script in the HUB, but has become way better over the year.
While I had AutoRuns for wscript in the past, it did not happen lately.

You can get impressions on TCPM in the HUB.