Battle Which Suite ?

[AMD1]

Hi,

I have had Avast 8 Internet Security (paid) and my subscription is up for renewal shortly.

I recently tested Bitdefender which seemed OK and currently have Comodo Internet Security 6 free version on test which is light on resources, has quite a lot of features and TrustConnect is available in the paid version with a monthly limit of 10Gb. Comodo gets my vote at the moment.

The only other security i run at the moment is MBAM Pro and SandboxIE for web browsers and testing programs (not AV suites though)

I am obviously looking to have minimum resources tied up with security but at the same time deliver solid performance. In addition I would like a VPN running and Sandboxing facilities which I can have with SandboxIE.

Any guidance to help improve the set-up would be appreciated.

Thanks

Andy

 

[ZeroDay]

With MBAM and Sandboxie I'd stick with Comodo, you're pretty much already set.

 

[Seany007]

Hello. Comodo is a great choice! Stick with it. It's a free powerful light protection. Also you don't need Sandboxie with CIS 6 since they have their own sandbox.

 

[jamescv7]

As you got the vote for CIS as preferred choice, then try a shot for Webroot SecureAnywhere Suite; its known for one of the lightest product and fully based on cloud.

 

[McLovin]

With MBAM and Sandboxie I'd stick with Comodo, you're pretty much already set.

I'd have to agree, with ZeroDay. If your already happy with Comodo and are running MBAM and Sandboxie why not stick with them.

Comodo is great for the advanced settings you can get and well you should know for the rest.

 

[Littlebits]

Depending on your download habits and online activity which would be the best for you.

If you always use caution and only download trusted files, use a secure browser with security add-ons and utilize UAC then you will not need a powerful aggressive protection suite.

Just about any free AV with Windows Firewall should be sufficient.

If you have been happy with Avast Security Suite then why not try Avast Free? it has all of the important features of the suite.

If you already run your browser in Sandboxie, it is not likely you will need anything more powerful.

Thanks.

 

[woomera]

avast IS if you dont mind paying for it. but if you wanna go free ,from the list i'd say CIS.

your other choice for free setup would be avast+CFW+sandboxie.

 

[ams963]

I'd go for Avast8 or sbie+mbam

 

[DreadedKamoteness]

lol comodo, based on "AV-Test" it has a record of only 84 and 90 for the months of january and february 2013 which is way below industry average of 95... if based on protection for a free A/V i'll settle for free avast which has 99 and 100 rating also on the months of january and february 2013... on system lightness on for a free A/V i also recommend avast, it ranks 3rd on lightest system impact based on the "AV-COmparatives" result on which Webroot was the lightest followed on 2nd by ESET... but still for bitdefender is the best :angel:

 

[starchild76]

I settle for zonealarm free and windows 8 defender right now.....runs light and hassle free unlike bitdefender and other blownup suites

 

[GA4E1]

What about avast! free + windows firewall?

Another combo would be avast free + comodo firewall

And the most straight forward would be Comodo Internet Security 6 on its own.

 

[DrBeenGolfing]

Well, I'm trying out UnThreat - it's as smooth working as it gets. Uses the Sunbelt GFI Viper signatures. No conflicts so far.

 

[jamescv7]

What about avast! free + windows firewall?

Another combo would be avast free + comodo firewall

And the most straight forward would be Comodo Internet Security 6 on its own.

Windows Firewall is fine from its factory settings/automatic configuration. (Except XP systems)

 

[Seany007]

lol comodo, based on "AV-Test" it has a record of only 84 and 90 for the months of january and february 2013 which is way below industry average of 95... if based on protection for a free A/V i'll settle for free avast which has 99 and 100 rating also on the months of january and february 2013... on system lightness on for a free A/V i also recommend avast, it ranks 3rd on lightest system impact based on the "AV-COmparatives" result on which Webroot was the lightest followed on 2nd by ESET... but still for bitdefender is the best :angel:

You are talking about detection here not prevention/protection.

 

[Moose]

Detection is one thing, but what about cleaning and repairing the computer after the damage is complete by
the virus. Which one would you use then?

 

[Zurchiboy]

lol comodo, based on "AV-Test" it has a record of only 84 and 90 for the months of january and february 2013 which is way below industry average of 95... if based on protection for a free A/V i'll settle for free avast which has 99 and 100 rating also on the months of january and february 2013... on system lightness on for a free A/V i also recommend avast, it ranks 3rd on lightest system impact based on the "AV-COmparatives" result on which Webroot was the lightest followed on 2nd by ESET... but still for bitdefender is the best :angel:

You should also watch the youtube videos. solely relying on Av-tests, and AV-comparatives isn't the best (They are good testing sites) But you should watch some of the youtube tests and see how the product acts, not just believing the paperwork done with AV-tests and AV vendors

---

Why do they test repair. all it shows is that a product won't protect from 100% of malware.

 

[Ink]

Voted Other.

I never hear anyone (mainly Forums) being satisfied by Internet Security Suites, it's always something or the other, or needing additional on-access scanners for "better protection".

The only Suite I'd recommend if by "no other choice" was given, would be Norton Internet Security (downside: it allows FBI backdoors) or, ... (not decided).

 

[Littlebits]

Detection is one thing, but what about cleaning and repairing the computer after the damage is complete by
the virus. Which one would you use then?

Things to consider in order of importance when choosing a security solution according to Littlebits:

1. Stability- if the solution(s) are not stable that cancels out everything else.

2. User friendliness- if a user can't understand how to use its features and configure it then the solution is useless to them regardless how good the other aspects are.

3. Compatibility- if the solution(s) are not compatible with Windows and your software, then don't waste your time with them.

5. System Response Time- this may or may not have anything to do with resources used, if it makes your system slow then try something else.

6. Real-time Protection features- this has nothing to with AV testing results or Youtube videos, it is how the solution(s) protect your system giving that you use common knowledge when downloading and installing programs plus have UAC enable to help you.

On-demand scans and removal features are just not that important anymore. Real-time Protection features should automatically detect threats without having to do an on-demand scan. All AV's do a terrible job with removing and repairing damage done by malware. You will most likely have to use several dedicated malware removal tools and do some manually fixing to repair damage. I always recommend a complete reinstall of Windows over manual repairs.

Thanks.

 

[jamescv7]

AV's are not good to install on infected system since isn't the duty to removed threats with malicious memory processes.

Primarily design to blocked incoming viruses. Thus it came from standalone scanners.

 

[abdoubouam]

i use zonealarm free firewall and avast 8 on a slow pc (cpu:celeron™ 3.06 ram:dd3 1,5go) but my system runs better than with kaspersky antivius