People still do this. I was talking to my friend who does repairs. He says he deals with this all the time. Average Joe's mentality is "Multiple AVs = multi-layered protection = better protection." Average Joe doesn't know any better.
Well actually "Multiple AV = Multi-layered Protection" is a misconception, it is better to call it "Multiple AV = Overlapping and Conflicting Protection"
Well of course we know this but the average home user basically doesn't.
But I do agree though, that a multi-layered protection is better than a full AV, except if you have something like Kaspersky Internet Security that has powerful features to call it almost as a complete multi-layered protection.
KIS maybe is almost complete, because it lacks Backup, Virtualization (like Shadow Defender), anti-exe (like VoodooShield), and etc. Well correct me if I'm wrong.
It is interesting to note that Emsisoft, formerly A-Squared (I was a fan of A-Squared! Some of Emsi's files/dlls still carry "a2" in their filenames) was originally made to complement other antivirus solutions, making it compatible to many AV in many years.
Yet in recent years, it was made as a full independent Antimalware, not to be run alongside any other AV, maybe starting in version 8 or 9?
"Richard here from Cylance. Glad to see you are POCing CylancePROTECT. In the case of running two AVs, Cylance is more than capable of running in a layered environment. Because our methodology is quite a bit different than those of traditional AV, they services won't be interfering with each other. Your deployment method is actually one we recommend to many of the new customers coming on board as well."
@Kubla Generally speaking, running multiple full-suite security solution installations at once is a bad idea and is asking for nothing but trouble. At the end of the day, it depends how they work. Cylance aren't saying you should run multiple Anti-Virus products, they're merely debating their own product and saying it is compatible with some other third-party traditional security solutions. There's a difference.
It's a well known fact that 2+ Anti-Virus suites = high potential for trouble. Some problems are of the past (e.g. quarantine conflicts), other problems are in the present (conflict of behavioural analysis interception, virtualisation usage, an AV trying to block activity by another AV, etc.). Conflict issues can lead to data loss (via corruption from unexpected BSODs) or in worst case scenarios, unbootable system. You might not even be aware if a conflict is on-going, then bam, you get hit with trouble.
If a product is designed to be ran alongside an full AV suite, then sure. If not, bad idea.
I agree with you, maybe the government have interest in using them instead of as a spy tool and that could be why they funded it. But it isn't every day the government fund a project, where's the funding for me huh?! After all they must want something back in exchange but I doubt we will find out what exactly that is for Cylance... because surely they won't dish out millions for nothing, probably of tax money paid by the citizens lol
After all they must want something back in exchange but I doubt we will find out what exactly that is for Cylance... because surely they won't dish out millions for nothing, probably of tax money paid by the citizens lol