Hot Take Kaspersky is overestimated, while Microsoft defender is underestimated

[Parkinsond]

I your humble opinion??

I practice cyber hygiene; have no precious data on my PC; why suffer performance impairment for added security that most probably I will gain nothing from!

 

[Sorrento]

I have some quite important data on my PC's so I'm pretty careful online, & agree that I want the lightest AV I can find with good protection (in my case ESET) being careful as to where we go online is I feel as important as where we go in real life & who we associate with - Good AV /lock-downs etc... protection in part of the overall system but avoiding potential risky sites & people is another part - Live long & prosper

Edit: (I offer a Vulcan prayer for all Malware tips members & Mods)

 

[Parkinsond]

I have some quite important data on my PC's so I'm pretty careful online, & agree that I want the lightest AV I can find with good protection (in my case ESET) being careful as to where we go online is I feell as important as where we go in real life & who we associate with - Good AV /lock-downs etc... protection in part of the overall system but avoiding potential risky sites & people is another part - Live long & prosper

MD is the best compromise between protection one side and performance (including unexpected glitches by Avast-AVG-Bitdefender) on the other side.
Only if you are using online banking or have very percious data on PC, you should look for the most aggressive protection.

 

[Zero Knowledge]

I would say ESET rivals MS with performance and resources + you get a web filter which Md doesn't have. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Parkinsond]

I would say ESET rivals MS with performance and resources + you get a web filter which Md doesn't have. Just my 2 cents.

Is web protection of ESET superior to that of K?

 

[Zero Knowledge]

Is web protection of ESET superior to that of K?

I haven't used K in awhile. But as I have previously mentioned in various posts ESET has probably taken over K as the best AV due to the political situation.

Honestly I would just use MD + uBlock + NextDNS or AdGuard if you don't have money for a ESET/AVAST/KASPERSKY or EDR license.

 

[Parkinsond]

I haven't used K in awhile. But as I have previously mentioned in various posts ESET has probably taken over K as the best AV due to the political situation.

Honestly I would just use MD + uBlock + NextDNS or AdGuard if you don't have money for a ESET/AVAST/KASPERSKY or EDR license.

I do not have money, but I can use K free version; its web protection for phishing is not satisfactory, but for malicious websites it is good (cannot say great; that is why asking about ESET web protection).

 

[Wrecker4923]

for malicious websites it is good (cannot say great; that is why asking about ESET web protection).

Are you not moving towards using Osprey browser extension like others?

 

[Parkinsond]

Are you not moving towards using Osprey browser extension like others?

I use Osprey when my AV is MD; do not prefer to use extensions with K or B.

 

[Wrecker4923]

do not prefer to use extensions with K or B.

I feel like B's Traffic Light extension (available separately for Firefox, but not for Edge) relies quite a bit more on encrypted traffic inspection, so they may not put a whole lot of effort into the extension. Malwarebytes Browser Guard seems to provide better protection, even more than Norton's extension.

 

[Parkinsond]

I feel like B's Traffic Light extension (available separately for Firefox, but not for Edge) relies quite a bit more on encrypted traffic inspection, so they may not put a whole lot of effort into the extension. Malwarebytes Browser Guard seems to provide better protection, even more than Norton's extension.

Extensions for B and K are needed only if you disable encrypted connections scan; without extension you have no web protection at all.

 

[Burbulator]

I see more and more enterprises replacing other vendors by Microsoft Defender for Endpoint on Windows, Linux and MacOS systems.
For me it seems that Microsoft slowly but surely creates monopoly on AV market especially on AV-market for consumers

 

[Parkinsond]

I see more and more enterprises replacing other vendors by Microsoft Defender for Endpoint on Windows, Linux and MacOS systems.
For me it seems that Microsoft slowly but surely creates monopoly on AV market especially on AV-market for consumers

then facing "monopoly jurisdiction" such as with internet explorer

 

[Zero Knowledge]

Thus is the problem with pure capitalism. It only works when there is real competition that pushes innovation and brings new technologies and advancements. The problem is the major players don't want competition they want to control the market and when they have control they push up prices when there is no competition left hence why we get monopolies and cartels. MS/Google/Apple/Amazon/Facebook are all modern cartels, the problem is they are too big and too many people have a vested interest (stock market, pensions) in not breaking them up that nothing gets done and regulation is toothless.

 

[piquiteco]

I use Osprey when my AV is MD; do not prefer to use extensions with K or B.

I use all 3 when I'm on the computer that has MD/CF. I'm very paranoid about protection on the web. When I have K on my laptop, the K extension alone is enough.

 

[Parkinsond]

I use all 3 when I'm on the computer that has MD/CF. I'm very paranoid about protection on the web. When I have K on my laptop, the K extension alone is enough.

K web protection is reliable; SS is so-so and needs augmentation.

 

[Wrecker4923]

For me it seems that Microsoft slowly but surely creates monopoly on AV market especially on AV-market for consumers

It doesn't seem they put in obstacles for third-party AV, and they don't seem to push anything except for being available by default and free, which I am sure is a fantastic thing compared to having no AV at all like in the past. I personally only see users and publications pushing the idea that MD is enough for most people. Then, we have people in this forum who think otherwise.

 

[Parkinsond]

It doesn't seem they put in obstacles for third-party AV, and they don't seem to push anything except for being available by default and free, which I am sure is a fantastic thing compared to having no AV at all like in the past. I personally only see users and publications pushing the idea that MD is enough for most people. Then, we have people in this forum who think otherwise.

The applies to internet explorer; MS did not put obstacles for installing other browsers, but pre-installing IE was considered as a monopoly.
MD is enough with less risky behaviors (cautious browsing and install); it is good but need a little bit improvement, especially for its silent FW with outbound connections.

 

[Wrecker4923]

MD is enough with less risky behaviors (cautious browsing and install); it is good but need a little bit improvement, especially for its silent FW with outbound connections.

Aren't you yourself cautious? If "common" users take you as a behavior model, wouldn't we all be looking for a more leading-edge free solution, despite the common user advice?

 

[Parkinsond]

Aren't you yourself cautious? If "common" users take you as a behavior model, wouldn't we all be looking for a more leading-edge free solution, despite the common user advice?

Please, do not take me as a model; I do stupid things occasionally