Serious Discussion Which AV from a privacy respecting perspective ??

[GoodMeasure]

I see and appreciate the Which AV are you using and why did you choose this one ?? thread. That is being asked and discussed primarily from a security point of view.

However; what about from a privacy point of view? In 2025, of the top AV/antimalware options, which are seen as doing less potential telemetry, advertising, and general spying on the user? I am thinking probably paid AV software, but also free. I am still very interested in quality security, but also on perceived trustworthiness on the privacy front. I feel like that is an important factor in selecting security software, but doesn't get discussed as much.

Trust me, I totally realize that there is no such thing as perfect privacy, but I don't think that is a valid argument to completely give up on it.

Recommendations? Thoughts?

Thanks!

 

[LDogg]

If done properly the native Windows security is more than does the job when settings are done properly.

~LDogg

 

[TairikuOkami]

Recommendations? Thoughts?

If you want privacy, you do not use AV, SmartScreen, smart app control, etc. Anything that uploads your files, file names or file hashes online. I know, mine (questionable) were banned.

 

[LDogg]

If you want privacy, you do not use AV, SmartScreen, smart app control, etc. Anything that uploads your files, file names or file hashes online. I know, mine (questionable) were banned.

Sometimes though you have to use common sense and use a blended approach to privacy and security.

~LDogg

 

[Marko :)]

I see and appreciate the Which AV are you using and why did you choose this one ?? thread. That is being asked and discussed primarily from a security point of view.

However; what about from a privacy point of view? In 2025, of the top AV/antimalware options, which are seen as doing less potential telemetry, advertising, and general spying on the user? I am thinking probably paid AV software, but also free. I am still very interested in quality security, but also on perceived trustworthiness on the privacy front. I feel like that is an important factor in selecting security software, but doesn't get discussed as much.

Trust me, I totally realize that there is no such thing as perfect privacy, but I don't think that is a valid argument to completely give up on it.

Recommendations? Thoughts?

Thanks!

The most private antivirus software is... no antivirus software. One of their purposes is data collection about which they'll gladly tell you how it's only done to protect you as a consumer. I'd have nothing about URLs, files being collected if they were hashed and encrypted, but the fact is most of the times they aren't. This is why I use Defender and only rely on standard virus definitions with cloud, SmartScreen completely disabled. I don't recommend anyone without experience doing this though.

If done properly the native Windows security is more than does the job when settings are done properly.

~LDogg

Yeah... in securing the PC. However, when we look at privacy, it's by far the most privacy invasive antivirus software for Windows.

If you want privacy, you do not use AV, SmartScreen, smart app control, etc. Anything that uploads your files, file names or file hashes online. I know, mine (questionable) were banned.

This...

Sometimes though you have to use common sense and use a blended approach to privacy and security.

~LDogg

I love how antivirus companies collect pretty much everything, build profiles on us, all in the name of security. But when they get hacked and data leaks they are like "sorry". I mean, like... weren't you the one that is supposed to protect me?

I'm still at opinion that there's no security without privacy. Hacker can't get anything if there's no data.

 

[Digmor Crusher]

I vaguely remember reading some kind of study about this a few years ago, if I remember correctly Emsisoft was one of the best for privacy. Sorry I don't remember where I saw this.

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

I see and appreciate the Which AV are you using and why did you choose this one ?? thread. That is being asked and discussed primarily from a security point of view.

However; what about from a privacy point of view? In 2025, of the top AV/antimalware options, which are seen as doing less potential telemetry, advertising, and general spying on the user? I am thinking probably paid AV software, but also free. I am still very interested in quality security, but also on perceived trustworthiness on the privacy front. I feel like that is an important factor in selecting security software, but doesn't get discussed as much.

Trust me, I totally realize that there is no such thing as perfect privacy, but I don't think that is a valid argument to completely give up on it.

Recommendations? Thoughts?

Thanks!

You can fully disable majority of telemetry in Symantec endpoint protection
But you will have to manually untick telemetry both during installation and after

Unlimited Giveaway - Symantec Endpoint Unmanaged without time limit

System requirements : Want to run a free SPEM server to manage your family computers, PM me for a license file (.SLF) (works up to 10 years ).

malwaretips.com

It used by governments /banks etc so it can be configured to be privacy respecting
Oh and you can route it's signature updates via a proxy or manually install it if you're using the dark client where it won't have access to the internet

 

[GoodMeasure]

I vaguely remember reading some kind of study about this a few years ago, if I remember correctly Emsisoft was one of the best for privacy. Sorry I don't remember where I saw this.

I think I saw that some time ago, too. Emsi is what I have been using for that (alleged) reason. I wonder how true it is.

I also wonder how private Eset is...

 

[KnownStormChaser]

Definitely not Windows Defender, because it's Microsoft, they'll take any info they can from you. Plus, it's good to diversify so not all your info is in one place.

Emsisoft is pretty well regarded as a private option. But technically, any AV that gives you the option to disable any cloud features should be good too. Just keep in mind, disabling the cloud features might reduce its effectiveness against viruses.

 

[Sandbox Breaker - DFIR]

Sophos and Checkpoint are both GDPR compliant. Gdata and Bit defender also.

 

[Sandbox Breaker - DFIR]

Kaspersky is FSB compliant

 

[monkeylove]

AVs by default go against respecting privacy because they have to be intrusive.

If you want to avoid that, then you will have to take on the role of an AV. That is, at best the AV downloads signatures and some means to detect unusual behavior. If it can't explain something that happens and is not allowed to go online, then it will inform you, the user. From there, you have to go over the logs and see what is taking place, and from there figure out what to delete or quarantine, and so on.

It's like that news about repair people viewing personal data and even copying them:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/marketplace-tech-repair-snooping-1.7000775

If you want to avoid that, and if they can bypass passwords by, for example, loading the device using another system, and then from there access the protected folders, then you'll have to backup the drive and factory-reset the device or have the drive or storage pulled out and given to you before they start repairing the machine.

And if it's a software problem then they'll have to repair the device in front of you, or something like that.

 

[Marko :)]

I vaguely remember reading some kind of study about this a few years ago, if I remember correctly Emsisoft was one of the best for privacy. Sorry I don't remember where I saw this.

AV Comparatives did the data transmission test two times; first in 2014 and then one in 2023. Here is the first version and Emsisoft indeed is shown as the AV software that collects the least amount of data. Along with Ahnlab, eScan, Fortinet and Bullguard.

However, the 2023 test indicates that some AV software got worse in data collection (like eScan). And Emsisoft wasn't tested.

I think I saw that some time ago, too. Emsi is what I have been using for that (alleged) reason. I wonder how true it is.

I also wonder how private Eset is...

Here you go: Data transmission in consumer security products

Definitely not Windows Defender, because it's Microsoft, they'll take any info they can from you. Plus, it's good to diversify so not all your info is in one place.

Emsisoft is pretty well regarded as a private option. But technically, any AV that gives you the option to disable any cloud features should be good too. Just keep in mind, disabling the cloud features might reduce its effectiveness against viruses.

Microsoft has a complete picture on every user and I have no doubt they connect data bases to make a profile about users. They collect your browsing habits, through Edge, Bing and SmartScreen, and Windows and Office are responsible for pretty much everything else.

Sophos and Checkpoint are both GDPR compliant. Gdata and Bit defender also.

All AV companies that work on EU soil have to be GDPR compliant. Avast was also GDPR compliant, but it was fined as it was caught selling data (Jumpshot).

 

[badboy]

I don't think you should worry too much, because all your data is already collected one way or another (ISP, OS, search engine, apps with registration by phone number, etc.). For example, it could very well be that your fingerprints are already with China (if your smartphone is a Chinese brand) or the US government if it's Apple or the Koreans if it's Samsung.

You don't even have to mention Google.

So antivirus products are the lesser of evils.

In any case, I don't think there is your first and last name folder somewhere that collects your data specifically. It's just a dataset, anonymized.

Just choose who you entrust them to. For example, I try not to choose Chinese or Russian services or antiviruses. So I don't use Kaspersky or AdGuard.

 

[Minimalist]

I think I saw that some time ago, too. Emsi is what I have been using for that (alleged) reason. I wonder how true it is.

I also wonder how private Eset is...

Years ago, when I was more "into privacy" as I am now, Emsisoft and F-Secure were known to be more privacy friendly. I don't know what is situation with them now.

With Eset I like how you can configure their cloud based protection (LiveGrid). You can enable only lookup part of protection without sending back data through their feedback system. Some other solutions don't offer such granular control over their cloud protection and they offer only all-or-nothing option.

 

[GoodMeasure]

I don't think you should worry too much, because all your data is already collected one way or another (ISP, OS, search engine, apps with registration by phone number, etc.). For example, it could very well be that your fingerprints are already with China (if your smartphone is a Chinese brand) or the US government if it's Apple or the Koreans if it's Samsung.

You don't even have to mention Google.

So antivirus products are the lesser of evils.

In any case, I don't think there is your first and last name folder somewhere that collects your data specifically. It's just a dataset, anonymized.

Just choose who you entrust them to. For example, I try not to choose Chinese or Russian services or antiviruses. So I don't use Kaspersky or AdGuard.

I like what you say about paying attention and choosing who to trust. That is solid advice that more need to hear!

I don't agree with some of the messaging in the world these days that we have already lost our privacy and that there is not much we can do. There are reasonable mitigations to significantly reduce many of the privacy threats that have been brought up so far.

Again, I do not see it as a black and white thing - as if you either have privacy or you don't. I feel like in today's technology landscape, a lot of people have just traded privacy for convenience, then rationalized the decision. But many of the mitigations are not even that difficult.

My friends, have faith. Keep fighting!

 

[rashmi]

Kaspersky is FSB compliant

In case people are wondering, FSB stands for "Fantastic Security Brand"!

 

[simmerskool]

With Eset I like how you can configure their cloud based protection (LiveGrid).

The current (Feb 2025) ESET Home page talks about LiveGuard, I mention that because at year or more ago, IIRC, they had LiveGrid &/or LiveGuard they were different features. I dropped Premium and currently running Nod32 which I think has neither but I could be wrong about that -- Nod32 is on VM and I don't run that one every day.

EDIT updated correction: digging deeper into ESET webpage, it mentions ESET is using both LiveGrid & LiveGuard (but I am not entirely clear what the difference is between them)

 

[simmerskool]

here is chatgpt understanding:

1. ESET LiveGrid (Cloud-Based Threat Intelligence)​

• Purpose: LiveGrid is ESET’s cloud-based reputation and threat intelligence system.
• Functionality:
  • It collects data from millions of ESET users worldwide to analyze and identify emerging threats in real time.
  • When a file or URL is accessed, ESET checks its reputation in LiveGrid to determine if it's known to be safe, suspicious, or malicious.
  • Reduces the need for frequent signature updates by leveraging cloud-based analysis.
• Benefit: Faster response to new threats without relying solely on local antivirus definitions.

2. ESET LiveGuard (Advanced Threat Defense)​

• Purpose: LiveGuard is a proactive, cloud-based sandboxing technology designed to detect and block zero-day threats, ransomware, and unknown malware.
• Functionality:
  • Suspicious files (e.g., EXEs, scripts, and documents) are automatically submitted to ESET’s cloud sandbox for advanced behavioral analysis.
  • The cloud sandbox executes the file in a secure environment, monitoring its behavior for signs of malicious intent.
  • If the file is deemed safe, it is allowed to run; if malicious, it is blocked and added to ESET’s global threat database.
• Benefit: Provides an extra layer of protection against unknown threats before they execute on a system.

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

here is chatgpt understanding:

1. ESET LiveGrid (Cloud-Based Threat Intelligence)​

• Purpose: LiveGrid is ESET’s cloud-based reputation and threat intelligence system.
• Functionality:
  • It collects data from millions of ESET users worldwide to analyze and identify emerging threats in real time.
  • When a file or URL is accessed, ESET checks its reputation in LiveGrid to determine if it's known to be safe, suspicious, or malicious.
  • Reduces the need for frequent signature updates by leveraging cloud-based analysis.
• Benefit: Faster response to new threats without relying solely on local antivirus definitions.

2. ESET LiveGuard (Advanced Threat Defense)​

• Purpose: LiveGuard is a proactive, cloud-based sandboxing technology designed to detect and block zero-day threats, ransomware, and unknown malware.
• Functionality:
  • Suspicious files (e.g., EXEs, scripts, and documents) are automatically submitted to ESET’s cloud sandbox for advanced behavioral analysis.
  • The cloud sandbox executes the file in a secure environment, monitoring its behavior for signs of malicious intent.
  • If the file is deemed safe, it is allowed to run; if malicious, it is blocked and added to ESET’s global threat database.
• Benefit: Provides an extra layer of protection against unknown threats before they execute on a system.

Liveguard actually puts the malware inside a sandbox and emulates it in the cloud so it's far more advanced then livegrid and comparable to what zonealarm does as checkpoint has a similar technology called threat emulation



Actually that's one of the reasons I really love checkpoint and eset as I believe cloud emulation is an important layer