Webroot, the only small AV left.

[Windows Defender Shill]

Ever since the Fall Creators update my pedestrian machine has been using considerably more resources. The culprit is primarily Cortana and our good friend Anti Malware Service Executable (Windows Defender).

I tried to adjust to this cruel demand of resources, (seeing how my name is Windows Defender Shill) but it was a hopeless cause. My el cheapo desktop was using almost half my available RAM without a active application running. Before the Fall Update of despair I liked to keep that idle number in the low 30s.

So this is why I have turned back to Webroot despite the fact I have a active Avast Internet Security subscription (I got for free, because Avast customer support is really nice). Avast IS would not have been a major improvement over WD, because they now use a lot more resources than you think. In addition Avast GUI is buggy and extremely slow to load on my machine.

As you can see above there is no other Anti Virus that can compete in terms of system impact. Which is now my primary concern. Avast Free is probably the second smallest but the pop ups are a disqualifier for me.

The criticism of Webroot will be aimed at it's so called "poor protection". Which is either voiced by anti malware extremist or by people who are just ignorant about the default protection process or the advanced pro active options Webroot offers. Webroot is beyond adequate security for a knowledgeable user. *It must also be pointed out Webroot can always be purchased at a very reasonable price.

I understand that the rapid advance in affordable high spec computers is a legitimate excuse for many AVs not to worry about system resources usage. But many of us still have pedestrian machines that can benefit massively from a small AV like Webroot.

 

[Deleted member 65228]

There's more to Webroot than just two processes which can be found with Task Manager; there is more to Webroot and memory usage.

 

[Handsome Recluse]

Unfortunate name you have there then.
Don't you also use Linux?

 

[TheJokerz]

I have used webroot for many years now. As you states this is more than enough protection for an individual that is smart about how they use their computer. I happen to like quick the software is, my scans last all of 30 seconds!

 

[GonzitoVir]

Interesting software. It is very light indeed and has some very good reviews.
Probably I should give it a try before my Dr.Web -which lately has slowed down my laptop- license expires.

 

[Arequire]

Avast Free is probably the second smallest but the pop ups are a disqualifier for me.

You can disable Avast's pop-ups by blocking all inbound/outbound network activity for AvastUI.exe via your firewall.

 

[Deleted member 65228]

You can disable Avast's pop-ups by blocking all inbound/outbound network activity for AvastUI.exe via your firewall.

This can potentially compromise security should Avast ever use the AvastUI.exe process for network queries related to protection; you wouldn't be aware of the changes necessarily because I doubt they'd be documenting it on their blog to expose how their technologies internals work themselves.

 

[ForgottenSeer 58943]

Criticism of Webroot is valid, in many tests it scores quite low from what I remember.

Also, the 'lightness' should be portrayed with guarded optimism, Webroot can cause serious issues. One of our MSP competitors recently moved 5,000 systems away from Webroot because of consistent issues, incessant whitelisting requirements and bloaded WRDATA folders consuming SSD drive space. Also, Webroot has been implicated in hiding itself within Explorer.exe to appear lighter than it really is, anyone remember the 10, even 20 times increase in memory usage of explorer.exe when Webroot was used/tested?



HUGE WRData file - Webroot Community

Before you install WebRoot anti-virus

My inlaws were Webroot fans, but I consistently found them infected with PUPS and Harmful Riskware. Each time I opened a ticket with Webroot they wrote them off as 'harmless' files/programs, when it fact I proved they were not harmless. Eventually they ignored my further tickets and some Triple Helix guy said I was too stupid to understand how Webroot worked. He bombarded my email with pie charts, graphs and marketing FUD about this or that super-neurotic-network technologies with fuzzy-AI and Albert Einstein brain encapsulation.

Let's not forget the recent fiasco where Webroot very nearly bricked millions of systems.

AV provider Webroot melts down as update nukes hundreds of legit files

Frankly, I wouldn't trust it. Ever.

 

[Soulbound]

Criticism of Webroot is valid, in many tests it scores quite low from what I remember.

Also, the 'lightness' should be portrayed with guarded optimism, Webroot can cause serious issues. One of our MSP competitors recently moved 5,000 systems away from Webroot because of consistent issues, incessant whitelisting requirements and bloaded WRDATA folders consuming SSD drive space. Also, Webroot has been implicated in hiding itself within Explorer.exe to appear lighter than it really is, anyone remember the 10, even 20 times increase in memory usage of explorer.exe when Webroot was used/tested?

My inlaws were Webroot fans, but I consistently found them infected with PUPS and Harmful Riskware. Each time I opened a ticket with Webroot they wrote them off as 'harmless' files/programs, when it fact I proved they were not harmless. Eventually they ignored my further tickets and some Triple Helix guy said I was too stupid to understand how Webroot worked. He bombarded my email with pie charts, graphs and marketing FUD about this or that super-neurotic-network technologies with fuzzy-AI and Albert Einstein brain encapsulation.

Let's not forget the recent fiasco where Webroot very nearly bricked millions of systems.

AV provider Webroot melts down as update nukes hundreds of legit files

Frankly, I wouldn't trust it. Ever.

If you go by that route, then 9 ou of 10 solutions you wouldnt trust due to their past.

The issue with explorer.exe was said over and over again in WR forums that it was not Webroot but what MS changed etc.

Either way, WR works just fine like any other solution if you know what you are doing or you just do not simply download anything or click anything under the sun.

They are one of the few solutions that started and have a roll back feature which although not 100% fool proof, it gets the job done.

Finally, lets not hang dirty laundry and talk bad about other users from other forums/websites. Let's keep it civil.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

This can potentially compromise security should Avast ever use the AvastUI.exe process for network queries related to protection; you wouldn't be aware of the changes necessarily because I doubt they'd be documenting it on their blog to expose how their technologies internals work themselves.

no, avast only uses AvastSvc.exe & aswidsagenta.exe to connect to the internet and protect. Also wsc_proxy.exe & AvEmUpdate.exe for receiving updates and a few more processes but never AvastUI.exe. Trust me, avast is fully functional without avastui.exe, it's for news, ads, popups, help guide, license/account management and free license subscription (doesn't affect pro license)

I did several tests and blocked every process 1 by 1 to see which one was needed

 

[Deleted member 65228]

no, avast only uses AvastSvc.exe & aswidsagenta.exe to connect to the internet and protect. Also wsc_proxy.exe & AvEmUpdate.exe for receiving updates and a few more processes but never AvastUI.exe.

I didn't say that AvastUI.exe makes network queries related to protection, I am saying that if one day they do happen to use AvastUI.exe for this, then automatically blocking connections via the firewall would potentially compromise security.

I trust what you are saying and if I used Avast then I would do what you/others are doing to block the pop-ups, but I am just saying to maybe keep an eye out for such changes because you never know haha.

 

[Deletedmessiah]

no, avast only uses AvastSvc.exe & aswidsagenta.exe to connect to the internet and protect. Also wsc_proxy.exe & AvEmUpdate.exe for receiving updates and a few more processes but never AvastUI.exe. Trust me, avast is fully functional without avastui.exe, it's for news, ads, popups, help guide, license/account management and free license subscription (doesn't affect pro license)

I did several tests and blocked every process 1 by 1 to see which one was needed

Silent mode would work right? Or will there be any compromise in security? I used Silent mode when I used Avast years ago and got no popups.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Silent mode would work right? Or will there be any compromise in security? I used Silent mode when I used Avast years ago and got no popups.

silent mode will stop all popups including the detection popup so you won't know what is going on and sometimes our files mysteriously disappear due to detection without popup. some malicious websites also blocked without any notification and we might think the websites are dead. I don't really recommend silent mode 24/7, just turn it on when we really need "silence"

 

[Deletedmessiah]

silent mode will stop all popups including the detection popup so you won't know what is going on and sometimes our files mysteriously disappear due to detection without popup. some malicious websites also blocked without any notification and we might think the websites are dead. I don't really recommend silent mode 24/7, just turn it on when we really need "silence"

Thanks for the info. I used to use silent mode all the time, will keep that in mind if I use Avast again someday.

 

[GonzitoVir]

Criticism of Webroot is valid, in many tests it scores quite low from what I remember.

Also, the 'lightness' should be portrayed with guarded optimism, Webroot can cause serious issues. One of our MSP competitors recently moved 5,000 systems away from Webroot because of consistent issues, incessant whitelisting requirements and bloaded WRDATA folders consuming SSD drive space. Also, Webroot has been implicated in hiding itself within Explorer.exe to appear lighter than it really is, anyone remember the 10, even 20 times increase in memory usage of explorer.exe when Webroot was used/tested?



HUGE WRData file - Webroot Community

Before you install WebRoot anti-virus

My inlaws were Webroot fans, but I consistently found them infected with PUPS and Harmful Riskware. Each time I opened a ticket with Webroot they wrote them off as 'harmless' files/programs, when it fact I proved they were not harmless. Eventually they ignored my further tickets and some Triple Helix guy said I was too stupid to understand how Webroot worked. He bombarded my email with pie charts, graphs and marketing FUD about this or that super-neurotic-network technologies with fuzzy-AI and Albert Einstein brain encapsulation.

Let's not forget the recent fiasco where Webroot very nearly bricked millions of systems.

AV provider Webroot melts down as update nukes hundreds of legit files

Frankly, I wouldn't trust it. Ever.

Oh wow... thank you for the information.

 

[brambedkar59]

As you can see above there is no other Anti Virus that can compete in terms of system impact.

Agreed Webroot is one of the lightest AVs. I would say FS-Protection (still in beta, it uses the f-secure ULAV engine) and EAM (not as much as other two) are pretty light weight too.
PS just because an AV's RAM usage is low, it does not automatically make it lighter on the system (unless installed RAM is inadequate from the start).
And to be honest Webroot is not without flaws, I faced the issue with the ever growing "WRData folder" (quickly reaches upto 2-3 GBs easily with very less apps installed).
I regularly used to check the logs for any app being monitored just to keep the size of WRdata folder small. Webroot customer care usually recommended just reinstalling and deleting the WRData folder if you asked them for the fix.
Whitelisting my apps every time a new version appeared was always a pain in butt.

 

[GonzitoVir]

If you go by that route, then 9 ou of 10 solutions you wouldnt trust due to their past.

The issue with explorer.exe was said over and over again in WR forums that it was not Webroot but what MS changed etc.

Either way, WR works just fine like any other solution if you know what you are doing or you just do not simply download anything or click anything under the sun.

They are one of the few solutions that started and have a roll back feature which although not 100% fool proof, it gets the job done.

Finally, lets not hang dirty laundry and talk bad about other users from other forums/websites. Let's keep it civil.

Yes, I've read that that roll back feature works well.

 

[woodrowbone]

If you are looking for a light AV, I must say that Panda free without the web protection always weights in under 10MB (mem usage) on my computers.
They have come a long way the last year in that regard.

/W

 

[ForgottenSeer 58943]

If you are looking for a light AV, I must say that Panda free without the web protection always weights in under 10MB (mem usage) on my computers.
They have come a long way the last year in that regard.

/W

Agreed here. Panda is turbo-lite without the bloated firewall and web protection stuff.

 

[Deleted member 65228]

If you are looking for a light AV, I must say that Panda free without the web protection always weights in under 10MB (mem usage) on my computers.

They use more than 10MB... Ask yourself, how are the protection components working for things like file-system real-time scanning? It'll have other things using memory like device drivers. The usage of the GUI and service process is not all there is to it most of the time