App Review McAfee: how bad is the worst antivirus?

It is advised to take all reviews with a grain of salt. In extreme cases some reviews use dramatization for entertainment purposes.
Content created by
TPSC
McAfee isn't the worst. Maybe it's misunderstood as it was resource hungry during the past and kept that reputation for a while until recent changes,mergers and acquisitions that vastly improved it.

For me the worst AV is in this list. One that is well known but does nothing and still sleeping up to now. This is 24H after....
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20250715-101342.png
    Screenshot_20250715-101342.png
    349.2 KB · Views: 150
Thats why i stopped answering, i dont want this very nice topic polluted.
It was nice with my tests and it is already polluted. With fanboyism.
Well, nothing really new as it's the same story as with the most topics in the forum section Video Reviews - Security and Privacy. At some point almost every discussion becomes flooded with biased opinions about which AV is better or which user has the preference for X or Y 🤷‍♂️
 
Well, nothing really new as it's the same story as with the most topics in the forum section Video Reviews - Security and Privacy. At some point almost every discussion becomes flooded with biased opinions about which AV is better or which user has the preference for X or Y 🤷‍♂️
Yep, we're passionate about what we use and why. I did my job, LOL, to help derail this thread with my opinions and bias ;) :)
 
At some point almost every discussion becomes flooded with biased opinions about which AV is better or which user has the preference for X or Y 🤷‍♂️
and without basic knowledge of how you can get malware and the methods to avoid, you will get infected machine, regardless how good is your security solution, and that is why I attend the forum, to get knowledge, not software.
 
and without basic knowledge of how you can get malware and the methods to avoid, you will get infected machine, regardless how good is your security solution, and that is why I attend the forum, to get knowledge, not software.
And if that gained knowledge due to tests, reviews and user feedback leads us (me) to a try a software, that's bonus :)
 
But so far I haven’t seen a single technical argument, all arguments against McAfee are shaky, to say the least.

They include:
Classifying McAfee as scandalous due to John McAfee who isn’t related to McAfee LLC in any way 20 years +.
Classifying McAfee as privacy disaster, because at a very low price point, they offer breach monitoring (how dare they) and need certain data to conduct it.
Classifying it as “over-marketed” without substantial information how much others spend on marketing.
Personal preference for a logo

And much more.
 
But I just don’t understand the big deal with this data. As already mentioned not once or twice, every breach monitoring service (whether it will be through Experian, Equifax), whether it will be through your AV provider (Bitdefender, Webroot, Avast, Norton, Avira, F-Secure) all offer breach monitoring. All of them will collect the same information.
When I installed McAfee it put its extension in Edge automatically, but when I was running firefox, McAfee offered to install its extension but only if I gave it permission to access my personal info or I had to uninstall it from firefox -- is this a McAfee "thing" or does that mean firefox protects your info better than Edge?? I dunno, if someone can explain, great! fwiw chatgpt says they do not all collect the same data, some collect more and do different things with your data, ie, some are perhaps more privacy respecting than others. Again, I dunno... :unsure:
 
But so far I haven’t seen a single technical argument, all arguments against McAfee are shaky, to say the least.

They include:
Classifying McAfee as scandalous due to John McAfee who isn’t related to McAfee LLC in any way 20 years +.
Classifying McAfee as privacy disaster, because at a very low price point, they offer breach monitoring (how dare they) and need certain data to conduct it.
Classifying it as “over-marketed” without substantial information how much others spend on marketing.
Personal preference for a logo

And much more.
I do not mind trading privacy for protection, and I like AVG logo.
 
But so far I haven’t seen a single technical argument, all arguments against McAfee are shaky, to say the least.

They include:
Classifying McAfee as scandalous due to John McAfee who isn’t related to McAfee LLC in any way 20 years +.
Classifying McAfee as privacy disaster, because at a very low price point, they offer breach monitoring (how dare they) and need certain data to conduct it.
Classifying it as “over-marketed” without substantial information how much others spend on marketing.
Personal preference for a logo

And much more.
I loved what you did in this post, i never said this or that is better. Thats why i stopped answering here. I appreciate all you test and keep up the good work !
 
Last edited:
When I installed McAfee it put its extension in Edge automatically, but when I was running firefox, McAfee offered to install its extension but only if I gave it permission to access my personal info or I had to uninstall it from firefox -- is this a McAfee "thing" or does that mean firefox protects your info better than Edge?? I dunno, if someone can explain, great! fwiw chatgpt says they do not all collect the same data, some collect more and do different things with your data, ie, some are perhaps more privacy respecting than others. Again, I dunno... :unsure:
McAfee Web Advisor needs your permission to access the websites you are viewing in Firefox, in order to block whatever it deems dodgy and block-worthy

As to collections, tell me which one you think is privacy-friendly and we’ll look into their data collection practices.
 
Speaking of trends, I installed Trend Micro Antivirus+ on two computers today as a test. On both computers, PayGuard's automatic opening at my bank and PayPal didn't work. I explicitly registered the sites for PayGuard and also specified them as trusted sites. Still, there was no automatic response from PayGuard. To be more precise, with PayPal, it worked on one computer and then stopped working again. I don't trust programs like that. So I uninstalled it again, or rather, restored a clean image.
fwiw, I have TM with PayGuard and used it several times and it worked as expected, no problems. Supposedly Eset Safe-Banking uses a different model and is more secure. Both are working ok for me. But then I am also told I don't really need this banking feature... but it feels good :)
 
For me its all good fun (and inexpensive) & I'm always up for trying something new & still happy I have that in me @ 66 years :D
I think you just described what I do. Install stuff for fun, on a machine only I use because I know what to do if things get messed up :) On my family and business machines, I use stable solutions that aren't changed until their licenses run out :)
 
fwiw, I have TM with PayGuard and used it several times and it worked as expected, no problems. Supposedly Eset Safe-Banking uses a different model and is more secure. Both are working ok for me. But then I am also told I don't really need this banking feature... but it feels good :)
I agree, same comfort I feel with Banking Protection.
 
The current version of McAfee has nothing to do with its origins. I doubt there is a single line of code from the original software as well. The current owners of the company have completely rewritten it to be a streamlined cloud solution. The fact it has few options to tweak makes it an ideal solution for people who have any difficulty with technology. Set it up for them and don't worry anymore. It's just like Bitdefender autopilot and other home user friendly products.
 
As a conclusion and final words, McAfee, Norton, Trend Micro in some versions, Bitdefender and many others are evolving.

Many years ago, “anti-virus” and firewall were the features offered.
Now, as anti-virus and firewall are also offered by Windows natively, if these businesses (mentioned above) want to continue existing, they need to evolve to a sustainable model, and offer more.

In the light of all that, the same vendors are moving to the service field — breach monitoring, account cleanup, email scan, social network monitoring and so on.

These services, like any other service and product, require data. They can not clean your online accounts unless you tell them all your email addresses and they can’t tell you if your number, SSN, email, Credit Card and so on are leaked, unless you give them the data.

There are still some more minor players like Emsisoft that haven’t migrated to the service model, if they wanna stay relevant, it’s only a matter of time before they form the necessary partnerships with third-parties.

That’s just the natural evolution of technology.
 
McAfee Web Advisor needs your permission to access the websites you are viewing in Firefox, in order to block whatever it deems dodgy and block-worthy

As to collections, tell me which one you think is privacy-friendly and we’ll look into their data collection practices.
thanks (you gave us great info re McAfee (& Checkpoint)) but unclear McAfee Web Advisor needs my specific permission in firefox but NOT in Edge, is this a McAfee thing or browser thing? I decided days ago not to be concerned about McAfee "data collection." Since you asked, I have heard / read Emsisoft is better re privacy, and I asked chatgpt to compare Emsisoft with McAfee re privacy, and it listed several reasons why Emsi is more privacy respecting then M. Assuming chatgpt is correct, it only knows what it reads, I prefer your tests, @Shadowra's tests, cruelsister's tests... & (some) user experiences posted at MT :)
 
Last edited:
As to collections, tell me which one you think is privacy-friendly and we’ll look into their data collection practices.
Emsisoft advertises that data protection is a top priority. With Emsisoft Browser Security, for example, the web address is not transmitted in plain text but as a hash value.