Hot Take [Updated 29/12/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

[Evjl's Rain]

Comparison between browser extensions

Test 29/12
Q&A - [Updated 29/12/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 24/11
Q&A - [Updated 24/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 12/11
Q&A - [Updated 12/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 7/11
Q&A - [Updated 7/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 6/9
Q&A - [Updated 3/9/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 3/9
Q&A - [Updated 3/9/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 2/9
Q&A - [Updated 25/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test, quick 1/9
Q&A - [Updated 25/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Fun test 25/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 24/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 24/7/2018 (most comprehensive, as possible)
Q&A - [Updated 24/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 19/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 10/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 18/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 10/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 10/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 10/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 7/6/2018
Q&A - [Updated 7/6/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 3/6/2018
Q&A - [Updated 3/6/18] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 25/4/2018
Poll - [Updated 25/4/18] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Update: 23/3/2018
Poll - [Updated 23/3/18] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings


Browser: Google Chrome 65 x64
Malware and phishing links: 10 malc0de, 10 vxvault, 10 openphish, 10 verified phishtank, 10 unverified phishtank
Total: 50 links

Spoiler: Links

Dropbox - link test 17-3-2018.txt

Extensions: recently downloaded from Chrome Web Store
- Google Safe Browsing (built-in chrome's protection)
- AdGuard AdBlocker: default settings, uses Google Safe Browsing (delayed) and their own database
- Avira browser safety: default settings
- Norton Safe Web: default settings
- Bitdefender Trafficlight: default settings, it rarely blocks any malware links, just old ones
- Avast Online Security: default settings, only has phishing protection, expected to score 0 against malwares
- Netcraft Extension: default settings, only has phishing protection, expected to score 0 against malwares
- uBlock Origin with some additional filters

Spoiler: ublock origin filters

http://hosts-file.net/emd.txt
http://hosts-file.net/exp.txt
http://hosts-file.net/pup.txt
http://hosts-file.net/psh.txt
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/hosts
https://ransomwaretracker.abuse.ch/downloads/RW_DOMBL.txt
https://ransomwaretracker.abuse.ch/downloads/RW_IPBL.txt
https://ransomwaretracker.abuse.ch/downloads/RW_URLBL.txt

NOTE: the result can vary from day-to-day. Tomorrow with different links, the result can be very different. All are live links but they can be dead a few minutes after the test. No duplication

Results:

Winner: Google Safe Browsing

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Is the adguard client or extension? Wich dns are you using?

I think im gonna remove voodooshield, and go with comodo firewall instead ( cs)
I would have same setup as you.
Then it would be like:
- Kaspersky free ( web filter)
- Comodo firewall ( web filter)
- neustar dns ( business protection)
- comodo dragon ( virtualized 24/7) Why? Because its using as much ram as without + wont break ublock filter updates)
- comodo dragon extensions;
- comodo online security ( can be removed)
- malwarebytes ( disable adblocking)
- tunnelbear = ( disable adblocking, let fingerprint, flash, script , malware blocking on.)
- nanoblocker ( default + annoyance+ defender filter ( no defender extension needed))
- privacy possum


On topic: Sad to see k9 + norton have so different results, since both products are owned by symantec

I recommend to only use kaspersky free as the main system-wise web filter, disable comodo firewall's web filter to avoid conflict and gain some browsing speed. Comodo's filter is far from good. It blocks only non-zero links

you can add the vxvault list to ublock to get a bit more protection

kaspersky + malwarebytes + browser filter + ublock

Edit: I don't trust yandex and opera, they are spywares
chrome is spyware but better and can be limited by firewall

I'm trying chromium (woolyss) now. Less spying components

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Is the adguard client or extension? Wich dns are you using?

I think im gonna remove voodooshield, and go with comodo firewall instead ( cs)
I would have same setup as you.
Then it would be like:
- Kaspersky free ( web filter)
- Comodo firewall ( web filter)
- neustar dns ( business protection)
- comodo dragon ( virtualized 24/7) Why? Because its using as much ram as without + wont break ublock filter updates) bit overkill tho
- comodo dragon extensions;
- comodo online security ( can be removed)
- malwarebytes ( disable adblocking)
- tunnelbear = ( disable adblocking, let fingerprint, flash, script , malware blocking on.)
- nanoblocker ( default + annoyance+ defender filter ( no defender extension needed))
- privacy possum


On topic: Sad to see k9 + norton have so different results, since both products are owned by symantec

I use the AdGuard extension.
I have an active subscription for AdGuard Desktop, but I find I extra certificate (Kaspersky) more than enough on my system.
I have excluded the scanning of EV certificates (my bank site).
At the moment I only use the DNS from my provider (Ziggo).
That is almost always the fastest DNS for me.

 

[Moonhorse]

I recommend to only use kaspersky free as the main system-wise web filter, disable comodo firewall's web filter to avoid conflict and gain some browsing speed. Comodo's filter is far from good. It blocks only non-zero links

you can add the vxvault list to ublock to you can get a bit more protection

kaspersky + malwarebytes + browser filter + ublock

Yup kaspersky + voodooshield+ syshardener is overpowered anyways. Also i would to have move avast + comodo if i would switch but nah

I think i cant get rid of privacy possum ( etags blocking over ublock)
And fingerprint is must since im used to it from now ( would be nice to have browser with built in one, brave just lacks extensions)

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Is the adguard client or extension? Wich dns are you using?

I use adguard extension
you know I hate adguard for desktop. I don't like it. it's not better than ublock and it caused problems to my laptop, conflicted with other AVs using https certificates (kaspersky)

I don't use any blocking DNS because I have to test malwares in the hub
I don't want to switch DNS before the test because DNS can block malwares from being downloaded, unfair result for tested products

I use 8.8.8.8, 1.1.1.1 because they are the fastest in my region
when the primary dns dies, the secondary dns will take over => never lose connection

I use adguard dns for my ipad, and android phone to block ads

 

[Moonhorse]

I use the AdGuard extension.
I have an active subscription for AdGuard Desktop, but I find I extra certificate (Kaspersky) more than enough on my system.
I have excluded the scanning of EV certificates (my bank site).
At the moment I only use the DNS from my provider (Ziggo).
That is almost always the fastest DNS for me.

Then you should go with:
kaspersky + malwarebytes + browser filter + ublock as @Evjl's Rain just stated
Maybe switch browser into lighter or tweak chromium with /flags

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Then you should go with:
kaspersky + malwarebytes + browser filter + ublock as @Evjl's Rain just stated
Maybe switch browser into lighter or tweak chromium with /flags

I prefer AdGuard to uBlock.
You can report missed ads from within the extension and they solve it for you.
Also their cosmetic filtering is a bit nicer to me.
WDBP saved my family once from a phising attempt, so it's hard to say goodbye
For the moment I will stay with Kaspersky + WDBP + AdGuard protecting Google Chrome.
I will test this combo regularly with @Evjl's Rain 's links and wanted again to thank him for his testing

 

[Nestor]

Online web protection IMO is the first line of defence, very important, maybe more important than the main Anti-Malware protection itself in most of the cases.

 

[Moonhorse]

Actually it seems adguard DNS blocks ads by default.. very useful and fast if you want to safe resources..also it wont detect my adblocker since i dont have one

How to set up AdGuard DNS

Only thing im missing is blocking ' this site uses cookie' messages that id like to get removed by annoyance filter some kind, maybe i run nanoblocker with annoyance blocker only

 

[upnorth]

@Evjl's Rain Is any of the other products you test, Beta versions like Thor RC?

 

[Evjl's Rain]

@Evjl's Rain Is any of the other products you test, Beta versions like Thor RC?

hi, malwarebytes is also a beta product
the rest are stable

 

[oldschool]

yes, I forgot to write avast's result although I did test it
avast: 3 => very good

you can see my tests of avast+syshardener here. So far, there has been no bypass yet. syshardener completely eliminate avast's weakness.....U

@Evjl's Rain - what SysHardener settings did you use please?

 

[Evjl's Rain]

@Evjl's Rain - what SysHardener settings did you use please?

 

[oldschool]

Many thanks @Evjl's Rain!

 

[tonibalas]

@Moonhorse for chromium browser you can also give a try to Cent Browser.
It is updated very often ( now is at chromium version 67) and has many settings to play with..
In my laptop it's the browser which has less cpu than other chromium browser including of course Chrome

 

[Moonhorse]

@Moonhorse for chromium browser you can also give a try to Cent Browser.
It is updated very often ( now is at chromium version 67) and has many settings to play with..
In my laptop it's the browser which has less cpu than other chromium browser including of course Chrome

I have tried to download it from the official site but theres something weird going with it. Waiting for link fix

I have waterfox as mainbrowser for now, chrome as backup

 

[Azure]

Do you use Windows 10? I have an issue connecting with the Microsoft Store if I disable the DNS client.

 

[tonibalas]

I have FF beta as main browser and Cent is secondary.
I can download Cent from their site both 32 and 64 bit installers.
You can also try Softpedia it has both versions available for download.

 

[Moonhorse]

On systemhardener , it wont block windows search

 

[Moonhorse]

I have FF beta as main browser and Cent is secondary.
I can download Cent from their site both 32 and 64 bit installers.
You can also try Softpedia it has both versions available for download.

uhhh, didnt even notice that mirror link there. Thanks, and are you using 32 or 64?

 

[tonibalas]

Since i have a 64 bit version of W7 most of my software are 64 bit including Cent and FF.
Compared to the 32 bit version both are using a bit more RAM.