How strange..., I tried phishing URL's obtained from openphish, I checked if there was Kaspersky detection in virustotal before opening the malicious link, when I verified that it was in the detection I tried opening it and indeed Kaspersky blocked the malicious link, then I did the same test disabling web injection and surprise, the same link was no longer blocked, I re-enabled web injection and Kaspersky blocked the malicious link, So what was I wrong about? because before stating something I first do my tests.
This is right, but I think depends on the detection type, still:
Inject script into web traffic to interact with web pages
If the check box is selected, Kaspersky application injects a web page interaction script into web traffic. This script ensures the operation of such components as Safe Money, Private Browsing, Anti-Banner, and URL Advisor.
So can I consider all products recommended? Here are snippets from previous tests of Shadowra:
This is what I was relying on more when I was viewing the previous reviews, so for example: even if Avast comes second in this test, I don't know if it's recommended over Avira in general by Shadowra.
Again, I'm not complaining, thanks @Shadowra for your efforts, you are the best.
This is right, but I think depends on the detection type, still:
Inject script into web traffic to interact with web pages
If the check box is selected, Kaspersky application injects a web page interaction script into web traffic. This script ensures the operation of such components as Safe Money, Private Browsing, Anti-Banner, and URL Advisor.
Yes, but when you go in general window of Avast you always see a warning about problems with security of your PC and proposition decide these problems with premium functions.
Yes, but when you go in general window of Avast you always see a warning about problems with security of your PC and proposition decide these problems with premium functions.
Comodo's antivirus and online web protection are - as the product owner Melih has said many, many, many times - "They are not needed."
Melih designed the product to NOT have strong antivirus and online web protection.
Why is that?
Because the product is a development of Melih's ideology about security software (the realities of), and well, test after test have proven him to be correct over the years. His only problem is he has to deal with users that are ungrateful, have no idea of the amount he spends out of his own pocket to maintain the product, and complain.
Comodo's antivirus and online web protection are - as the product owner Melih has said many, many, many times - "They are not needed."
Melih designed the product to NOT have strong antivirus and online web protection.
Why is that?
Because the product is a development of Melih's ideology about security software (the realities of), and well, test after test have proven him to be correct over the years. His only problem is he has to deal with users that are ungrateful, have no idea of the amount he spends out of his own pocket to maintain the product, and complain.
I would personally not install comodo software on any family computers, that being said most of them would fall victim to phishing than an actual infection. which is why consumers need web protection I'm not talking about MalwareTips users that can spot phishing easily. Why is Melih not wanting to make minor changes? Look how far Avast has come from the 2007 days it went from music player to top player now in 2025.
What is so hard about offering web protection most if not all companies offer it? I just don't get why comodo has never matured at all in these aspects. Malwarebytes literally built Malwarebytes browser guard in 2020 and look how far they have come! Banning users on the forums doesn't make his company look good constructive criticism is a part of owning a business. when you ban your customers what do you think the outcome of it will be?
If he's struggling so hard and pulling money out of his pockets maybe he should consider actually taking suggestions seriously instead of rage hitting the ban hammer on his revenue.
I would personally not install comodo software on any family computers, that being said most of them would fall victim to phishing than an actual infection. which is why consumers need web protection I'm not talking about MalwareTips users that can spot phishing easily. Why is Melih not wanting to make minor changes? Look how far Avast has come from the 2007 days it went from music player to top player now in 2025.
What is so hard about offering web protection most if not all companies offer it? I just don't get why comodo has never matured at all in these aspects. Malwarebytes literally built Malwarebytes browser guard in 2020 and look how far they have come! Banning users on the forums doesn't make his company look good constructive criticism is a part of owning a business. when you ban your customers what do you think the outcome of it will be?
If he's struggling so hard and pulling money out of his pockets maybe he should consider actually taking suggestions seriously instead of rage hitting the ban hammer on his revenue.
I just point out the REASONS why Comodo was developed and WHY certain features are the way they are.
Comodo was developed according to Melih's ideology about antivirus. Plus, I have to keep saying this over-and-over, it is fully paid by Melih and as the product owner he decides how much he wants to spend on the product. If people expect or want more from Comodo, then they need to pay for it.
Avast is a paid product. Millions of paying subscribers subsidize the free version. Comodo has no paying users. It is truly 100% zero cost freeware and the person that pays for it is the product owner, Melih.
Neither Comodo nor Melih are struggling financially. Melih is a billionaire.
Nobody has to use Comodo and Melih does not owe any user a single thing.
Avast the spyware disguised as AV ,top player in user data collect and it have collecting so much user data that it get caught and bought by Norton(for financial reason) because it cost way less with the backslash its spyware behaviour.
I would personally not install comodo software on any family computers, that being said most of them would fall victim to phishing than an actual infection. which is why consumers need web protection I'm not talking about MalwareTips users that can spot phishing easily. Why is Melih not wanting to make minor changes? Look how far Avast has come from the 2007 days it went from music player to top player now in 2025.
What is so hard about offering web protection most if not all companies offer it? I just don't get why comodo has never matured at all in these aspects. Malwarebytes literally built Malwarebytes browser guard in 2020 and look how far they have come! Banning users on the forums doesn't make his company look good constructive criticism is a part of owning a business. when you ban your customers what do you think the outcome of it will be?
If he's struggling so hard and pulling money out of his pockets maybe he should consider actually taking suggestions seriously instead of rage hitting the ban hammer on his revenue.
If he will partner with quad9 for example it will give him access to their huge intelligence network
So if he wanted he could find cheap ways to improve web defense
Avast the spyware disguised as AV ,top player in user data collect and it have collecting so much user data that it get caught and bought by Norton(for financial reason) because it cost way less with the backslash its spyware behaviour.
That is why i do not use avast! Malwarebytes plus windows defender configured to high and sandboxie is all you need great web protection as well use same setup with family.
In this video, we compare 8 free antivirus programs.
The aim is to see how effective they are, and rank them from worst to best.
Please note:
- the antiviruses are already ranked in the video, I've taken into account Web blocking, the reaction to an attack, my malware pack and how the antivirus will defend itself.
- Please be courteous and respect my ranking. Filming took over 9 hours and 2 hours of preparation.
- the winning antivirus goes straight to the final, episode 3.
- all antivirus are default, I've only activated IF NECESSARY some options that the editor hasn't activated (heuristics, PUP detection etc.)
- the protocol is the same.
Panda is a relatively lightweight free antivirus.
It has no Web filtering, and the Web protection rating is based on blocking downloads.
Web: Panda blocks all malicious downloads, 9/9.
Crack: Panda intercepts malicious executions. 1/1
Pack: Panda leaves 30 malwares out of 111 after a fairly long scan.
Upon execution, Panda will try to defend itself as best it can, but will return a completely infected system.
KVRT will even report malware that has injected a system process.
It will be 8th, last.
Nano is a totally unknown Russian antivirus.
Surprisingly, on the 1st installation, it failed...
I had to restart the installation using the snapshot, which worked.
Nano features Web filtering.
Web: Nano blocks half the links, one of which is dead. 5/9
Crack: Nano blocks installations. 1/1
Pack: Remains 26 out of 111. A rather disappointing result, joining its competitor Panda.
It will be 7th, even if it's a bad result, but it put up a slightly better fight than Panda AV.
360 is a popular Chinese antivirus.
It offers many free solutions but tends to install bloatware, which I refuse (like Opera).
Some functions, such as the firewall, are not free, so you'll have to make do with the free version.
I install the KuPeng engine and also activate it for protection.
Web: 7/9 . Qihoo is missing 2 URLs, including a stealer that will close Edge.
Pack: Remains 8 out of 111, even 5 out of 111, which is an excellent score!
But it loses points for not detecting the false crack, the stealer that passed without reacting, the insistence on Bloatwares and a big false positive on a VirtualBox process, unforgivable as a false positive!
He came 6th.
Huorong is also a Chinese antivirus, a competitor to Qihoo.
It's an antivirus I had to configure: the heuristics and its Machine Learning were deactivated. I don't understand this choice, so I decided to activate them.
Web: 5.5/9: Huorong lets infections through, especially stealers. Surprisingly enough, Huorong blocks the URL but lets me download and even execute it!
It gets half a point despite the error, as the HIPS tried to catch up.
Crack: Huorong blocks installations. 1/1
Pack: Remains 7 out of 111, excellent score. Huorong defends himself with his HIPS, blocking several attacks. Remnants of infection are present.
In 5th place, an improvement on Infostealer scripts and Trojans is recommended, as it still suffers from shortcomings!
Comodo is an antivirus that should not have been tested.
Since I've added an extra spot in the paid list, Comodo has inherited its place.
The program behaves like a free security suite.
Web: 9/9 including 3 anti-malware reactions. Comodo will use its Sandbox to protect the system.
Crack: 1/1, reaction from its anti-malware engine.
Pack: 77 out of 111, the worst score ever!
One thing's for sure: Comodo's anti-malware engine is very bad!
At runtime, Comodo will mainly use its Sandbox. Some VirusScope detections, but rather weak. I had to restart the VM twice because the Unicorn worm was saturating my RAM...
During analysis, a few traces are present despite the Sandbox, but nothing alarming.
It's 4th because its Web protection is non-existent, its anti-malware engine is clearly lagging behind and it relies entirely on the Sandbox, which I certainly find a good protection, but I'd have liked to see something else…
Avira is a well-known German antivirus company, acquired by Norton in 2021 to form Gen Digital, but still owns its engine.
In the configuration, I've enabled detection of dangerous tools.
I installed its 2 extensions, one of which (Safe Shopping) does Web filtering.
Web: 10/10. Nothing to say, Avira blocks at source.
Crack: After a fairly long execution time due to analysis on the Cloud, Avira blocks the launch (TIME/APC).
Pack: Remains 18 out of 111. Avira blocks several executions thanks to its Cloud, leaving us with a healthy machine. 2 small traces are visible with KVRT.
It's 3rd.
Avast is the famous free antivirus, widely known to the general public.
In this test, we opt for its complete suite, One.
Web: Avast blocks all URLs, 10/10
Crack: CyberCapture authorizes launch, but execution .bat is blocked. 1/1
Pack: Remains 11 out of 111. Avast makes a clean machine, infection attempts blocked by Web filtering and IDS.
It is 2nd
The antivirus built into Windows!
For years, Microsoft has been improving its security solution against malware.
I did not activate SAC for this test.
Web: 9/9, MS Defender blocks all downloads. One file is dead
Crack: MS Defender blocks all installations. 1/1
Pack: Remains 4 out of 111, even 3 out of 111, the best score!
The other files don't work, I'm very surprised by his score!
Congratulations Microsoft, he's 1st and will take part in the final!
Thank you for testing the effectiveness of free antiviruses.
For me, both the Free and Paid Antiviruses does a good job, but has some differences.
The difference between Free and Paid antiviruses:
Free Antivirus - offers limited features like Real-time protection, Web protection, and more. It has limited protection against common threats ( like malware, phishing, or even scams. ). But, may not offer better detection against -- major threats ( like Ransomware, Cryptojacking, etc. ). Some free antivirus like Bitdefender or Kaspersky -- can detect or block even unknown malwares or fileless attacks.
Paid Antivirus - offers more features that are unavailable in the Free version. It has better protections against both common ( like malware, phishing, or scams. ) and major threats ( like Ransomware, Cryptojacking, etc. ). Some paid antivirus like Bitdefender or Kaspersky -- can detect and block even unknown or fileless attacks.
But... there are things I am worried about free antiviruses ( some are my exception ):
-> Some free antiviruses may be intrusive, bombard you with pop-ups asking you to pay for premium features, or use scare tactics to scare you into buying a subscription -- in order to be fully protected.
-> Some free antiviruses may be ineffective against unknown malware or fileless attacks.
-> Some free antiviruses may not offer the same level of protection, as my free antivirus I did make an exception.
-> Some free antiviruses may contain even adware or infect you with viruses or malware.
However, there are some paid antiviruses that may be intrusive you should ever immediately avoid ( like Norton, McAfee, Avast, AVG, etc. ).
The only antiviruses I should ever immediately avoid -- and NEVER use those are:
x - Avast
x - AVG
x - Norton
x - McAfee
The only antiviruses I marked as my exception are:
/ - Microsoft Defender
/ - Bitdefender
/ - Kaspersky
So, the decision of whether or not you use paid antivirus, here's my ideal situation:
If you are -- a user, who do not engage in high-risk activities -- and never download or click anything suspicious, and use common sense.
= Free Antivirus ( that are NOT intrusive ) should be something you could picked.
If you are -- a user, who engage in high-risk activities like downloading things ( such as videos, musics, etc. ) from the internet, nevertheless if you are being cautious or be careful on what you are visiting or downloading, and use common sense.
= Paid Antivirus ( that are NOT intrusive ) should be something you could picked.
For me, I should rather stick with "Microsoft Defender with DefenderUI Pro" as a home user, and use common sense.
Overall, I liked your video. Good thing -- that Microsoft Defender win.
I think for some reason, Free Antivirus might be ideal for Home user. Not designed for Organization, Business or Enterprise user. So, in order for Microsoft Defender to have better protection as if you are a Home user:
-> Add DefenderUI ( Free or Pro ) to your system. For me, I use DefenderUI Pro.
For better security:
-> Pick a good browser, always set it up a good browser settings ( like disabling all features that your default settings would reduce your overall security in "Site settings", block third-party cookies, enable "Do not track" feature, set to "Enhanced Protection", disable "Autofill" feature, always enable "Ask where to save each file before downloading" to reduce the likelihood of falling into "Drive-by download" attacks, and set to "Open the New Tab page" in "Settings > On Startup") for security, and you are good to go.
-> Use security extension like uBlock Origin and Malwarebytes Browser Guard. Always check your "Site settings" for each extension, and disable everything ( despite not being able to disable anything that's in gray area. ) that seem unnecessary, and you are all set.
-> Use web security tools like VirusTotal, ScamAdviser, Have I been Pwned?, and more.
-> Do not ever click on links from Email, SMS, or any Social media apps.
-> Do not ever answer unknown calls.
-> Do not ever click on the "Blue text" ( this is where hidden link is placed that redirect you to something random. It can be a safe website, fake website, malicious website, phishing, or scam website. ).
-> Do not ever download anything from untrusted sources.
support.kaspersky.com
