Question Which AV are you using and why did you choose this one ??

[TIBCSI66]

I have a valid license for both applications:McAfee Mobile Security,Bitdefender Mobile Security.
My phone: Samsung A56.
I would use one for phishing protection and fraud protection.
Which one do you recommend?

 

[Nunzio_77]

Ho una licenza valida per entrambe le applicazioni: McAfee Mobile Security, Bitdefender Mobile Security.
Il mio telefono: Samsung A56.
Ne userei uno per la protezione da phishing e frodi.
Quale mi consigli?

Bitdefender Mobile Security

 

[gery79]

i really miss using bitdefender

 

[Jonny Quest]

I have a valid license for both applications:McAfee Mobile Security,Bitdefender Mobile Security.
My phone: Samsung A56.
I would use one for phishing protection and fraud protection.
Which one do you recommend?

Which one will protect you for the browser (supported browser) you're using? Not to corner @Nunzio_77 but he is a Mod on the BD forum, maybe he can go into a little more detail of what he likes about BD Mobile Security and why he uses it? Cheers, Nunzio, and Happy New Year

As far as BD Identity Theft, is only for people in the US. Otherwise, they also have Digital Identity Protection. Both can be found at the top of the Website/Privacy and Identity drop down tab. McAfee's Identity Monitoring (as a whole) may have greater resources and have a longer track record, but you would need to find out more from someone who has experience with it.

What’s included with Bitdefender Identity Theft Protection​

We combined advanced detection technology, real-time alerts, 24/7 U.S.-based support, and identity recovery in a unique solution.

Bitdefender Identity Theft Protection is available for US only. Registration requires a valid Social Security Number.

Bitdefender Identity Theft Protection is available on Chrome, Firefox, Microsoft Edge and Safari.

I have a license for McAfee Total Protection but haven't run it on my phone yet, until my F-Secure subscription runs out (I'm not a phone power user, more of a laptop user).

 

[Victor M]

Which AV are you using and why did you choose this one ??​

I chose Eset because it has configurable rules.

Configurable rules allow you to make a hard ban on certain things, whereas the AV must use weights on several detections before it quarantines anything to avoid false positives so that it suites everyone. So you can say when this occurs, definitely stop this because I don't ever do it. This is important, your rules suites your work habits, and anything abnormal to you should be/can be banned. This is the kind of thinking that good security teams do, they detect what is abnormal. Eg, this employee is an office administrative assistant, she never uses powershell. So the security team sits up straight when powershell is used on her PC. When an AV has configurable rules, it can ban powershell and stop it, immediately, before the attack succeeds. Prevent first. There is always a time laspe before a security team can detect.

Powershell, as you know, is very powerful. It can disable security protections, open a hole in your firewall, set up scheduled tasks so that the hackware can contact the attacker's server regularly. Whatever malicious thing you can think of, it can do. Attackers love powershell. Fileless malware love powershell.

Another thing is that configurable rules should have an enable/disable switch. So that, when a sys admin goes to that employee's computer to do some work, he can disable that powershell ban rule temporarily when using the admin account.

I also chose Eset because our previous AV failed to block registry modification in a rule. It has configurable rules, but it is not functioning in our environment. Proving to yourself that a security product works is essential, or your carefully designed security scaffold collapses.

So that's why I chose Eset.

 

[Jonny Quest]

@Victor M what I find impressive about your post, as well as other who have posted the many HIPS's rules etc. entered into Eset, is that they actually hold, they are actually enforced, compared to the other AV "has configurable rules, but it is not functioning". Eset is one of the more stable and dependable AV's out there, especially for those more advanced settings and modifications. They have a lot of features and options, that actually work, and aren't just window dressing. Just my observation and experience, FWIW

 

[LinuxFan58]

On my Linux laptop none, on my wife's Windows laptop Defender, because Andy Ful made tools to make it run in MAXimum Zero Tolerance mode with Attack Surface Reduction Rules.

 

[Nunzio_77]

Which one will protect you for the browser (supported browser) you're using? Not to corner @Nunzio_77 but he is a Mod on the BD forum, maybe he can go into a little more detail of what he likes about BD Mobile Security and why he uses it? Cheers, Nunzio, and Happy New Year

As far as BD Identity Theft, is only for people in the US. Otherwise, they also have Digital Identity Protection. Both can be found at the top of the Website/Privacy and Identity drop down tab. McAfee's Identity Monitoring (as a whole) may have greater resources and have a longer track record, but you would need to find out more from someone who has experience with it.


I have a license for McAfee Total Protection but haven't run it on my phone yet, until my F-Secure subscription runs out (I'm not a phone power user, more of a laptop user).

I definitely recommend it for its effectiveness, lightness, and discretion in dealing with any overly invasive pop-ups.
Merry Christas and happy new year @Jonny Quest

 

[Divine_Barakah]

I chose Eset because it has configurable rules.

Configurable rules allow you to make a hard ban on certain things, whereas the AV must use weights on several detections before it quarantines anything to avoid false positives so that it suites everyone. So you can say when this occurs, definitely stop this because I don't ever do it. This is important, your rules suites your work habits, and anything abnormal to you should be/can be banned. This is the kind of thinking that good security teams do, they detect what is abnormal. Eg, this employee is an office administrative assistant, she never uses powershell. So the security team sits up straight when powershell is used on her PC. When an AV has configurable rules, it can ban powershell and stop it, immediately, before the attack succeeds. Prevent first. There is always a time laspe before a security team can detect.

Powershell, as you know, is very powerful. It can disable security protections, open a hole in your firewall, set up scheduled tasks so that the hackware can contact the attacker's server regularly. Whatever malicious thing you can think of, it can do. Attackers love powershell. Fileless malware love powershell.

Another thing is that configurable rules should have an enable/disable switch. So that, when a sys admin goes to that employee's computer to do some work, he can disable that powershell ban rule temporarily when using the admin account.

I also chose Eset because our previous AV failed to block registry modification in a rule. It has configurable rules, but it is not functioning in our environment. Proving to yourself that a security product works is essential, or your carefully designed security scaffold collapses.

So that's why I chose Eset.

I got Eset Essential two days ago from StackSocial and so far so good. I did not configure any settings and it is very fast. I do like it.

 

[Smoke]

ESET because it has great protection & performance and most of all it's one of the few AV vendors that I don't feel like I "need" a seperate firewall program for.

Ask to connect, temporary connections etc.

 

[Brownie2019]

I chose Eset because it has configurable rules.

Configurable rules allow you to make a hard ban on certain things, whereas the AV must use weights on several detections before it quarantines anything to avoid false positives so that it suites everyone. So you can say when this occurs, definitely stop this because I don't ever do it. This is important, your rules suites your work habits, and anything abnormal to you should be/can be banned. This is the kind of thinking that good security teams do, they detect what is abnormal. Eg, this employee is an office administrative assistant, she never uses powershell. So the security team sits up straight when powershell is used on her PC. When an AV has configurable rules, it can ban powershell and stop it, immediately, before the attack succeeds. Prevent first. There is always a time laspe before a security team can detect.

Powershell, as you know, is very powerful. It can disable security protections, open a hole in your firewall, set up scheduled tasks so that the hackware can contact the attacker's server regularly. Whatever malicious thing you can think of, it can do. Attackers love powershell. Fileless malware love powershell.

Another thing is that configurable rules should have an enable/disable switch. So that, when a sys admin goes to that employee's computer to do some work, he can disable that powershell ban rule temporarily when using the admin account.

I also chose Eset because our previous AV failed to block registry modification in a rule. It has configurable rules, but it is not functioning in our environment. Proving to yourself that a security product works is essential, or your carefully designed security scaffold collapses.

So that's why I chose Eset.

But Eset is very difficult to uninstall. I had always problems with this software!

 

[Victor M]

very difficult to uninstall.

I had done it twice, did not encounter any problems. What other security software do you run ?

 

[tasos83]

Emsisoft!