Advice Request Qihoo and PUPs?

Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.
Status
Not open for further replies.
QVM III seems to be detecting some PUPs as malware/Trojan generic (doesn't matter if you had enabled the PUP detection), also they are known in China to install their products in software bundles and whitelistening their PUPs (see Qihoo vs Tencent; 360 Safe Browser camouflaged as IE; PSafe in Brazil and a large etc).
They only detect PUPs that are not their own :mad:.
Regards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kev216, Deleted member 2913, Der.Reisende and 5 others
I don't think 360 is good against PUPs as I have seen it allowing so many PUPs paticularly chinese ones

The best against PUPs in order I rated:
1/ zemana - deep scan or C: scan only, smart/default scan detects not many PUPs
2/ Malwarebytes
3/ reasoncore (reasoncore scanner, unchecky & herdprotect)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 2913, Der.Reisende, Sr. Normal 2.0 and 4 others
Maybe someone can validate this or has different experiences, but I would say no. Q360 is behavior monitoring + straight defs recognition. It will catch a program attempting to change a startup during installation, and this is where it is best. However, it doesn't seem to detect PUPs during installations, etc. The installer might trigger an alert as geminis3 said, but I don't recall this happening a great deal...mostly Windows key finders or programs with a potentially malicious use. 360TS detection doesn't focus on PUPs as far as I can tell. IDK, maybe I haven't installed very many PUPs. MBAM is much better based on what I have seen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 2913, bayasdev, Der.Reisende and 4 others
Evjl's Rain said:
I don't think 360 is good against PUPs as I have seen it allowing so many PUPs paticularly chinese ones

The best against PUPs in order I rated:
1/ zemana - deep scan or C: scan only, smart/default scan detects not many PUPs
2/ Malwarebytes
3/ reasoncore (reasoncore scanner, unchecky & herdprotect)
Click to expand...
Are you referring to real-time protection or on-demand scanning best result?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 2913, Der.Reisende, AtlBo and 1 other person
HarborFront said:
So, in your opinion, which product (inclusive of internet security suite) offers the best real-time PUPs protection?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Did you mean the well-known AV vendors? to be honest, I don't see any of those big AVs are good against PUPs simply because they are likely to be sued if their signatures are too aggressive against PUPs

In realtime protection against PUPs, the list is quite the same
1/ zemana
2/ malwarebytes
3/ voodooshield - based on the virustotal result
4/ Reasoncore products - not worth the money, their products are so-so against other threats but good against PUPs
 
  • Like
Reactions: shmu26, Deleted member 2913, Der.Reisende and 3 others
AtlBo said:
what about Hitman Pro? Haven't ever used it, but it seems to show up at the end of many a-v reviews when the reviewer performs scans.
Click to expand...
it's good also but I haven't had enough chance to test it for PUPs. It's a paid product and provides no realtime protection. After 15-day trial, a key must be entered to remove stuffs. HMPA has realtime protection but doesn't block PUPs

on dayily basis, I just use zemana to scan C: drive and malwarebytes (usually no need for MB). After all I use adwcleaner and JRT. No PUPs left
 
  • Like
Reactions: shmu26, Deleted member 2913, Der.Reisende and 2 others
Evjl's Rain said:
it's good also but I haven't had enough chance to test it for PUPs. It's a paid product and provides no realtime protection. After 15-day trial, a key must be entered to remove stuffs. HMPA has realtime protection but doesn't block PUPs

on dayily basis, I just use zemana to scan C: drive and malwarebytes (usually no need for MB). After all I use adwcleaner and JRT. No PUPs left
Click to expand...

You seems to like going the hard route,(eset,avast,norton,zemana,malwarebytes and emsisoft) all detect and stop pup's even comodo firewall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _CyberGhosT_, Venustus, AtlBo and 4 others
Qihoo definitely does not provide good PUP detection from my usage of it, I find that they have a very fine line of categorizing what is PUP and what is not, and some times they side with those who create the PUP.

Go for AVs that have an strong stance of having no PUPs like Avast, Avira or even AVG

Edit:
Assuming you are going for free.

If you don't mind paid AVs, ESET has one of the best PUP detections IMO
 
  • Like
Reactions: Der.Reisende, AtlBo, FrFc1908 and 1 other person
I'm not real keen on PUP protection because in my experience security programs treat many perfectly good programs and extensions as PUPs. I turn off PUP detection on my ESET and haven't found cause to regret that so far.

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Unchecky for PUP protection. After all, isn't piggybacking on other downloads the main source of PUPs?

And I recommend to you all my favorite PUP protection: a neat little very lightweight freeware called ExeWatch. It gives you a very easily accessible (one click) log of .exe or .bat files that come on your system. And it makes a visual display and sounds whenever an executable is coming on board. So if something is getting installed on your system when nothing should be being installed--as can happen with malvertising--with ExeWatch, if you are within earshot of your computer you will know about it.

Only problem I have with it is that it includes creation of System Restore points in its detection. But it's very easy to check whether that is what is being monitored.

I love ExeWatch, but if there are other programs that do the same thing I would like to try them as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo, Der.Reisende and shmu26
Its not the best against PUP's mainly because of china's stance on such programs.

However, Pair 360 with something like Voodooshield, NVT Exe Radar or Comodo firewall and you have a great setup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hector1 and AtlBo
Majority of AV's including Qihoo are passive on PUP detection and unfortunately everything have different conditions / criteria.

Honestly PUP's by picture are not malicious but considered grayware because of unnecessary behavior thus AV's ignored it, as the purpose of detection is determine malicious like hiding or protecting the program itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Antimalware18
Status
Not open for further replies.

You may also like...