Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MacDefender" data-source="post: 918077" data-attributes="member: 83059">Yeah I think some of those advantages are thanks to F-Secure taking a minimal AV + BB (process injection) approach. I think having the full blown network filter in ESET helps them a lot in intercepting and scanning secondary payloads. Kaspersky and even Windows Defender ATP uses a few different kernel drivers to more closely monitor application activity across the system. Norton/Symantec has a driver that sits between the TCP/IP stack driver and the network card driver which performs IPS and other things.Each one of those components I mentioned has been implicated in some BSODs, weird networking lags around sleep/wake, and mandatory reboots (at least for uninstallation).Historically F-Secure Internet Security tried to do all of this stuff too and became a huge bloated mess. Today&#039;s F-Secure came out of the UltraLight beta concept, and keeping it minimalistic was a goal for them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MacDefender, post: 918077, member: 83059"] Yeah I think some of those advantages are thanks to F-Secure taking a minimal AV + BB (process injection) approach. I think having the full blown network filter in ESET helps them a lot in intercepting and scanning secondary payloads. Kaspersky and even Windows Defender ATP uses a few different kernel drivers to more closely monitor application activity across the system. Norton/Symantec has a driver that sits between the TCP/IP stack driver and the network card driver which performs IPS and other things. Each one of those components I mentioned has been implicated in some BSODs, weird networking lags around sleep/wake, and mandatory reboots (at least for uninstallation). Historically F-Secure Internet Security tried to do all of this stuff too and became a huge bloated mess. Today's F-Secure came out of the UltraLight beta concept, and keeping it minimalistic was a goal for them. [/QUOTE]

Verification