I keep using some Adblocking + Manual scanning antivir combo and haven't seen any virus in ages.

I use Proxomitron in all my browsers. Firefox is my main browser (addblock plus is installed).

I second the opinion that even web sites that seem safe can make you infected even if it's not intended on their part.

Malik wrote:

Hmmm....Kapersky Internet Security is even 4 cents cheaper than Symantec Internet Security. ($79.95 vs $79.99 for 1Yr-3PCs.) :ha […]
Show full quote

Hmmm....Kapersky Internet Security is even 4 cents cheaper than Symantec Internet Security. ($79.95 vs $79.99 for 1Yr-3PCs.) 😁

What do you guys think about those free online scanners? Almost every company is offering the free service. I'm sure it won't be as good as the installed (read paid) version, but still...

If using a basic router's firewall, installing an ad/pop-up blocker, and a browser-integrated anti-malware plugins along with online scan (and good surf practices) - does that sound too good to be true?

I'm still using a PAID antivirus, just to give the benefit of the doubt, and it's better safe than sorry.

BUT, the thought of the anti-virus downloading HUNDREDS of megabytes of "updates" every few days, (after 20 days, it's almost always more than 100MBs plus make me cringe. After 3 or 5 days, it's more than 10MB)

Usually I maintain multiple systems and even my laptop has 2 hard hardrives with 3 OS, each in it's own partition - (hence the 3 PC license I used to get) - Win7x64, WinXPx86 and Linux (flavor changes according to my mood. 😁 )

Sometimes I wonder if I'm buying and choking my casing with hard drives just to fill up with virus definitions and updates?

In this fast moving, cruel world, a classic DOS machine still gives the much needed comfort. No *#^$ing updates. Just load up a game, sit back and listen to the Roland's music, and relax...

Anyway, coming back to the topic, the Kapersky seems tempting... especially with it's 4 cents discount! Too bad my norton auto-renewed this year....aaaaarrrggghhhh.... But on the other hand, though it seems bloated, it doesn't bog down my system (or maybe I've grown numb to it 🤣) and seems to work without interrupting me. The reason I bought the Norton 360 was because of the seamless performance when it came out (version 4.0)...but maybe that was because I just changed from BitDefender....which annoyed me almost everyday, saying it is out of date the next day, complains that the system has not been scanned...or at the very least it keeps displaying the cross or "something's not right" icon on the system tray almost everyday. (even after I set it to "Don't Disturb Me For Silly Things Settings")

I guess, I have to review at the end of each year, to see which anti-virus suite got better to use the following year.

If you want free I recommend Avast for realtime and use Malwarebytes to run a scan periodically. Personally I don't like AVG as it uses more systemresources and has some other issues. I also recommend a firewall like ZoneAlarm. I'm not sure but regcleaners like Ccleaner can perhaps also help against virusses.

When I had the sasser virus on my system years ago, I was able to get rid of it because it only affected Windows XP and had a double boot config with Windows 98 from which I could remove it. So to have Linux in double boot isn't such a bad idea, even if it is for backup.

eL_PuSHeR, what is the "Manual" scanning that you mentioned? And which Adblocker do you use? I remember you mentioning your methods in other threads too.

I mean I have real-time protection turned off. In the event of downloading something I scan it manually (on demand).

Surefire way of getting viruses is surfing "free" pr0n sites... avoid those and any free anti virus would do. Haven't seen one in years on my systems. Whether Win98, 2000, XP or 7.

Personally I stay the fuck away from Mcafee, and if I see it on a machine. Which is within my grasp of control, then I remove the shite, faster than a speeding bullet. I have a friend who had Mcafee on his pc, for one day. And the next day it was infected as bloody hell with viruses , so fuck Mcafee ! I would rather install Eset, or Kaspersky any day of the week. In comparison to the POS named Mcafee. And for removing add/spy ware. There I personally recommend malwarebytes and super anti spyware. The best two remover programs and scanners of nasties. But I can also say , that trojan remover (Simply Super Software) is good. But that is first after I have done the deed with malwarebytes, and super anti spyware. And scanned the heck out of the pc with a good anti virus program.

Regarding the AV comparative, look closer - the "winner" isn't even on the list of awards for FP rate. They could probably have 100% FPs (ie detect every file on the system) and still be first, because they detected all of the malware, too. Testing has issues, you can't rely on the ratings alone.
Oh, and don't forget that it's the AV companies that are supplying most of the samples that are being tested by those same AV companies.
Heh.

Guys, if you want to compare antivirus, you should take a look at the MOST important metric in real life!

The vast majority of malware infections in real life are caused by new/unknown viruses.

Detecting older viruses is a piece of cake, almost all of the antivirus get excellent scores and extremely high detection rates when dealing with old, and boring, viruses.

The real deal is in the new viruses that have been launched very recently (usually in the same day that people get infected).

AV Comparatives deals with them using a "Retrospective" test. This means that they collect all the viruses and antivirus updates from a chosen day in the past and rank them according to their detection rate.

That's where things get ugly really fast! The detection rate drops from 95% for old viruses to a pathetic 50-60% for new viruses.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories … tro_may2011.pdf

http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories … tro_nov2011.pdf

The only solution is to admit that ALL antivirus (both free and commercial) are absolute CRAP. And be always careful of what you download from the internet.

Gemini000 wrote:

Even on legit sites, on rare occasions some kind of infection will show up, usually the result of a bad ad.

WolverineDK wrote:

I would rather install Eset

funny thing... I just finished cleaning up this PC I'm on right now. Got hit by a goddamned ad... on a legitimate local news website. Payload was one of those "Internet Security" pests (brings up a fake "trojan scanner", closes all your shit, and prevents you from running anything, with the excuse that it's "infected with Worm.Blaster").

I use Adblock Plus, but it doesn't stop ALL ads. The AV I have here is ESET NOD32, fully updated and paid for (from work). Of course, it was completely useless - the log proudly reported 1 file detected and removed... too bad the other *5* got a free pass, right? Cleaning them all manually took no more than 10 minutes in Safe Mode w/ regedit, so how hard can it be? THANKS, ESET.

moral of the story, you're never safe, no matter how much money you throw at AV vendors, or stay away from bad neighborhoods on the internet. At this point I'd just do all my web browsing in a VM if it was feasible.

eset is crap, you just figured that out?

adblock plus alone doesn't do everything
you need to run no script

VileRancour wrote:

At this point I'd just do all my web browsing in a VM if it was feasible.

Just load up VirtualBox and go to it. 😀

too much overhead, takes too long to start
easier to just run your browser in SVS

A VM only takes one time to start after installing the OS. Then you can just suspend them and wake it up which takes about 2-3 seconds with VMware.

2-3 seconds on a machine with globs of ram and a fast hard drive
much longer than that without them

running apps on SVS? always starts immediately because it runs seamlessly on top of your host system! and uses way less memory

I personally think that antiviruses are necessary if you're going to be using the internet at all, but on offline systems they're basically just a waste of system resources.

I agree with that.

For offline systems I would go without antivirus.

I think viruses are overrated. I havent ran one on my main system for about 3-4 years. That being said, I'm also pretty damn smart about where I go on the interwebs. I also have a system that can can run GENUINE virtual machine software. I use it to inspect things that I don't know about or goto websites that are "questionable" Also porn.

my virtual xp system has only needed 1 total reset. and that was from spyware. took 2 minutes to revert back to my clean disk image. ^.^

I remember a discussion on one of the Mac enthusiast sites some time ago extolling the virtures of Mac Os X due to it's supposedly no virus nature and thus ability to serve as a prime pR0n station.

Some time ago OS X WAS quite safe (even if it was due to it not being an attractive target). Especially when you didn't download and install warez. It isn't anymore.

Yes there is an ever-increasing amount of malware that targets OSX out in the wild now.
By design it is inherently safer than Windows but it is not immune.

VileRancour: It sucks to be you about the infection . But from personal experience I have not had any viruses in my pc since I installed Eset. And do you know what ? Eset is still much fucking better than Mac*puke*afee.