Anti-Virus you get what you pay for

[Machstorm]

I am incline to agree for the most part. I have had experience with multitudes of free anti-Virus such as AVG and there is a reason why it's free. Next time an end user needs a virus removed and calls up again for example AVG for help guess how much they are going to be charged. Some cases I have seen it's on upward of $150+ dollars. Some cases the user just bought a copy of McAfee and was lucky enough that that had resolved the issue.

In any case you can argue that you are a cheap skate and that you don't feel like paying $30 to $40 for an anti virus or that you don't have the money, but is that really the issue? Don't get me wrong that some protection is better than none. In the end it's up to you how much your data is worth. Is it worth nothing or is it worth something?

http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2009/...free-antivirus/

[h3%5kr3w]

umm... I definitely beg to differ. Sounds to me like Symantec is trying to give a little of the ole' don't get that for free cause were better cause you will pay for our products shpeil.

I truely call bullshit sir, and you should know better. shame on you. I have seen Symantec products screw up more computers than you can shake a damn stick at. And to top it off there is no secret that they are not doing very well at all in the market these days, so before you come in here beating your "I'm better cause I pay for my software" speech, know your facts.

Wanna know what I am rollin' with? NOTHING! I had a free antivirus program, but I reloaded and felt I do not need it. Do I have viruses? Most probably not. Do I care? nope. I'll just reload, or better, I have an updateable Virus protection suite on a memory stick. It's free, it runs off linux and best yet... It's free.

Now as far as people calling AVG and begging for help.. well that's the end user's fault. They could have bought the pay for version of AVG just as well, but regardless, that is why everybody knows someone like us so they can fix it and we can have a little beer money here and there.

oh and btw... There is a link on the same page as that article that goes to this: http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2006/...ellow-big-deal/

At the bottom the writer says this: "I’ve even jumped on the band wagon, downloading and installing the free Norton 360 Beta security software; which includes an automated backup of your files online for up to 250 MB and 2GB when released in a few months, not to mention all the other goodies that come with other Norton products such as anti-virus and anti-spyware protection, anti-fraud features, automated backup and restore, and computer tune-up tools. It’s a beautiful thing. Everything is automated, and runs efficiently with windows using very little system resources. I’ve always claimed that Symantec products have never slowed my machine down, and that’s the first thing I look for in security software. I’d gladly trade a fast computer with Big Yellow, for a slow one without Symantec."

If you can't see the paid for journalism there, then you can't see anything. It sounds more like a damn add than a brag. ANY antivirus software slows down a computer in some way or another, unless you have a new Core i7 with 16gig's of memory...

Does anyone disagree with me on this? (besides Machstorm)

[Sparda]

The first and last Anti-Virus program I paid for Norton Anti-Virus 5 (or some thing like that, ran on Windows 98 and was before subscription based antivirus). What is quite interesting though is Symantec not having a cry about Windows 7. Windows Defender will detect loads of stuff as you download it and activity prevent you from been an idiot.

[Netshroud]

Free antivirus does not protect you completely. It protects you from viruses. He's just twisting the truth.

[ssmithisme]

I absolutely hate Norton. Norton never finds anything anyway.

Personally I stopped using anti virus at all, because I dont go executing random code.

But in the case that an anti virus is needed. AVG Free is a very very good product. The only difference between free and paid for version is support.

[dr0p]

Norton is without a doubt the most failure of a pay-for antivirus I've ever seen. I'd take AVG free over Norton any day, but in the end Common Sense is the best damn antivirus I've ever seen and used.

[psydT0ne]

well here's how i see it...

The only true protection you have against all the nasty things out there is your own ability to modify your behaviours and habits in your day to day use of the internet. Take a look at Steve Gibson from GRC who gets by day to day using absolutely no antivirus software at all and he uses windows xp.

To have faith in a software solution by itself, is a naive point of view that one can ill afford.

Particularly if your data is important enough to want to throw a fistful of dollars at an out of the box solution and then bitch and whine when it doesn't do it's job because your still dumb enough to click on email links to malicious scripted pages or malformed packets exploiting god knows what.

Antivirus packages whether paid for or free can only be seen as a very small part of overall security.

Someone once said to me that security is about having the right attitude. Like Dr0p said...Common Sense !!!

As far as removing virri from the machine once it infected?

I have a mantra that I tell everyone about...Backup Format Reinstall Do Dah Do Dah.

[Brian Sierakowski]

I've read a few articles that state for the highly technical, Anti Virus typically does nothing more then to present false positives and use up system resources.

The main way viruses spread is through people downloading and execute infected code and software vulnerabilities, so as long as you keep up to date with patches and stick to the beaten patch on the web, I think you'll be fine.

There is also something to be said for the false sense of security that's created too, I think even technical users get the feeling of "I have an anti virus program, therefore I am invulnerable."

[deleted]

Hmmm... Ive been using a free anti-virus for years now and come to think of it, ive not actually had a virus since I ditched Norton. So in terms of symantec, The Higher the Cost, the more Bloat there is.

[IOSys]

You don't get viruses from not having AV, you get viruses from doing stupid things ..

.. like having XP and always run as admin, using IExploder and allowing arbitrary web-sites to execute

code via java-script or activeX or downloading obscure cracked software from even more obscure sources .

And you know what ?

As soon as you disable heuristics all those expensive AV's don't find anything !

Because 7zip is not an evil virus trying to infect your temp-dir ..

I’ve always claimed that Symantec products have never slowed my machine down

ROFL .. what a ho !

[ssmithisme]

I stopped using Anti-Virus apps entirely, because they use resources that could go toward something else.

I use Firefox+ Noscript for all my web browing needs. First thing I install, Firefox+Noscript.

That solves my web vulnerabilities and then everything else is just a matter of not executing code that I no clue what does.

People that pay for anti virus are usually the ones getting a hell of a lot of them. Sometimes I receive machines that are so fscked up, Norton says"hey your machines clean" One pass over with AVG reveals a whole different story. That usually worsens the deeper I go with more tools.

[Timmo]

i prefer to use Avira AntiVir and Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware rather than AVG. i have had way too many PC's come to me full of virus' and they run AVG. most of them use music downloading utilities as well. and i also use a hardware firewall between my network and the outside so i can safely say im pretty safe. as well as using firefox with no script so i cant get any nasties from automatically running codes i havnt got a clue about.

as for Symantec products not slowing down your computer... pffffft. we had to use Symantec Anti Virus at the place i used to work and we could tell when SAV was running a scan, your system would run really slow, hdd use would be at the max and if you look in task manager you could see the scanning process (rtvscan i think) was using a lot of memory. it wasnt much better when we went to Symantec Endpoint Security...

[Chalito]

The only Anti-Virus i've used in the past 3-4 years has been Avast and I love it. I have never had an issue with it and it updates everyday. If I happen to navigate to a site that has some shady stuff on it Avast comes up fast and lets me know that I should abort the connection. Avast is probably one of the better AV's out there in my opinion.

[h3%5kr3w]

Last AV I used is Avast. Any computers I reload I put that on there (unless they have like a paid subscription to mcafee or something)

If you look into alot of Viruses your actually better off having something like Avira than Norton. Reason being is, if you have not updated in awhile, what is the first thing a virus usually does? Riiigghht... IT DISABLE YOUR ANTIVIRUS. Why? cause it first checks to see if you have Norton, or McAfee, or one of the other big boys. Now as far as Avira or AVG, I will have to say that AVG to me has kinda slumped in the past since they basically make you partake in an easter egg hunt to download it from their site to make you just want the pay for version.

Now we can argue all day that a pay for version has more virus databases than a free organization, but guess what? It does'nt mean a hill o beans if the virus first disables it.

To top it all off, the way norton security is implemented, if something screws it up and you need to uninstall it, then good luck, you might as well try to uninstall IE8 from windows 7 (talking about the new pay for upgrade, not the rc). Not gonna happen completely unless you have the UK version.

And did anyone have any experience with the Norton Network tools version? Remember what happens if the norton firewall decides to take a crap? NO INTERNET. I repeat, NOOOOOO INTERNET. It doesnt let any traffic in, or out. so your stuck reloading. WOW, something great to pay for...

[Machstorm]

Norton is without a doubt the most failure of a pay-for antivirus I've ever seen. I'd take AVG free over Norton any day, but in the end Common Sense is the best damn antivirus I've ever seen and used.

How? I have had no issue with Norton ever since I started back in 2004. Then Again I do know more about Norton than most people due to the nature of my profession. I just don't see how you can call it "most failure of a pay-for antivirus" although one should note that when most users install Norton (or instert Anti Virus name here) they due tend to click past the install window that list the incompatible software and most don't have the knowledge on how to work around subjects such as adding exceptions.

The only reason why people get that angry at software is because they did something with it that they did not understand or were not supposed to or They ignored the install software installation screen that takes about two miles to scroll down to view known issues and compatibility report.

Oh and lets not forget the people that complain about Norton, McAfee, etc.. not finding anything. Such absolutes are not credible, maybe if you were talking in a group that would work, but not with everyone. What didn't it find? The spy ware and or Trojan that was made at 8:00 in the morning which was about the time you might have been visiting a questionable website.

[dr0p]

How? I have had no issue with Norton ever since I started back in 2004. Then Again I do know more about Norton than most people due to the nature of my profession. I just don't see how you can call it "most failure of a pay-for antivirus" although one should note that when most users install Norton (or instert Anti Virus name here) they due tend to click past the install window that list the incompatible software and most don't have the knowledge on how to work around subjects such as adding exceptions.

The only reason why people get that angry at software is because they did something with it that they did not understand or were not supposed to or They ignored the install software installation screen that takes about two miles to scroll down to view known issues and compatibility report.

...

Norton has a lower detection rate than almost any other pay-for antivirus out there and on top of that, it's also a resource hog (although it HAS gotten better about this). On top of that, if you've ever tried to uninstall Norton, you'll know that it likes to stick around even after it supposedly has been uninstalled. I may be a bit biased since I just can't stand antiviruses in general since they delete the code that I wrote (is it so wrong to hook an API?) and I don't get viruses anyways.

[N3CR0S1S89]

How? I have had no issue with Norton ever since I started back in 2004. Then Again I do know more about Norton than most people due to the nature of my profession. I just don't see how you can call it "most failure of a pay-for antivirus" although one should note that when most users install Norton (or instert Anti Virus name here) they due tend to click past the install window that list the incompatible software and most don't have the knowledge on how to work around subjects such as adding exceptions.

The only reason why people get that angry at software is because they did something with it that they did not understand or were not supposed to or They ignored the install software installation screen that takes about two miles to scroll down to view known issues and compatibility report.

Oh and lets not forget the people that complain about Norton, McAfee, etc.. not finding anything. Such absolutes are not credible, maybe if you were talking in a group that would work, but not with everyone. What didn't it find? The spy ware and or Trojan that was made at 8:00 in the morning which was about the time you might have been visiting a questionable website.

ROFL, Yea I think you were dropped on your head cause Norton's is horrible. You dont have to be "leet" to use Norton's and how the hell do you "use" Norton's any better than someone else unless said person was completely technologically ignorant? I mean seriously its just a few settings and anyone who can use google can properly set up Norton's (if you could call it that) with little trouble.

Also Norton's is horrible for false positives and I have actually used Norton's to scan files that I know to be infected after AVG, Trend Micro, and Avast all reported it (not all false positive's because I purposely put the virus on the machine running under VMware) while your wonderful Norton's found NOTHING <-- all Norton's does other than use up resources (and dont give me that crap about it not being up to date because it was). dr0p is also right about the uninstall. Most of the time you have to run at least 3 uninstallers to "remove" all the different crap Norton's installs and even then it somehow runs on startup (not in the taskbar but does show up as a process if you run process explorer).

Well anyway I personally use AVG Free and it works great because I dont go to malicious sites looking for Trojans and Spyware. Any customer who wants something better than AVG Free I will offer Trend Micro or Panda but I personally Prefer Trend Micro because its easier for "normal" people to use and panda tends to slow down the machine but both do a great job.

F**k Norton's!

[MBP]

arch usually solve my virus problems :)

[silentknight329]

has anyone here even tried norton 2009? its actually quite good, it detects and average users spyware and stuff.. like limewire songs that actually viruses... i personally use kaspersky... i like it alot..

[Machstorm]

ROFL, Yea I think you were dropped on your head cause Norton's is horrible. You dont have to be "leet" to use Norton's and how the hell do you "use" Norton's any better than someone else unless said person was completely technologically ignorant? I mean seriously its just a few settings and anyone who can use google can properly set up Norton's (if you could call it that) with little trouble.

Also Norton's is horrible for false positives and I have actually used Norton's to scan files that I know to be infected after AVG, Trend Micro, and Avast all reported it (not all false positive's because I purposely put the virus on the machine running under VMware) while your wonderful Norton's found NOTHING <-- all Norton's does other than use up resources (and dont give me that crap about it not being up to date because it was). dr0p is also right about the uninstall. Most of the time you have to run at least 3 uninstallers to "remove" all the different crap Norton's installs and even then it somehow runs on startup (not in the taskbar but does show up as a process if you run process explorer).

Well anyway I personally use AVG Free and it works great because I dont go to malicious sites looking for Trojans and Spyware. Any customer who wants something better than AVG Free I will offer Trend Micro or Panda but I personally Prefer Trend Micro because its easier for "normal" people to use and panda tends to slow down the machine but both do a great job.

F**k Norton's!

I said nothing about being "leet" to use Norton. Although I am inclined to think that you were dropped on your head by the way you ended your burning missive. Just because I said I know more about Norton than most people does not make me "leet". I just know from experience and a whole lot of research to know how to resolve problems with Norton and other pay anti Virus's.

Also which version of Norton are you talking about? you seem to be leaving out details just to emphasize your irrational hatred for said product.

As far as a "lower detection rate" again which version are you referring to.

I also noticed that you said that Norton was a resource hog however you don't mind it When panda slows down your system?

Lastly you do have one hell of an inferiority complex to be that disturbed or outraged at a post when someone shows a proficiency towards products you hate.

Drop , are you referring to Norton system works 2006 or 2007 with Norton Go Back? If you are I understand your frustration many users had a hell of a time uninstalling that. Although I don't think Go back is used anymore if that's the case.

I do admit thought Norton does not like some of my network security programs (password crackers) to begin with. Although I have not run into any problems (yet) with programs I created.

For the most part if anyone has an issue with Norton or McAfee installed on their system I can usually help because I deal with them on a daily basis.

Silentknight329, I have Norton System Works 2009 installed and it is far better than previous versions. I have noticed a smaller install foot print and less services running in the background. Also the New versions of McAfee and PC Cillin are quite good too

[nicatronTg]

To be perfectly honest, I pay for NOD32 just for the event that I have to download something that is possibly obscure. It does a fine job, but to be honest, so long as your not an idiot and follow something like

Dude steam is giving away the new half life 2 episode 3 beta! its so sick. im stuck trying to fight a advisor. you have to cut the tubes that let it breath and suffocate it. its so fun. go install it at <removed>.co.cc

your doing fine.

[dr0p]

@Machstorm: I'm not sure exactly, waaaay back when my mom had the only computer in the house she decided to put Norton on it and when it started its scan at 1AM my starcraft went to shit ): The last encounter I had with it was taking it (along with the other bloatware that came with my brother's new lappy) off his laptop about a year ago. It did NOT want to go away nicely, there was one process that I had to manually hunt down to get rid of after running the uninstallers since Symantec can't even create one uninstaller that gets rid of everything. And the detection rate is compared to the other ones on things like VirusTotal; on the online scans of stuff Norton fails to detect a lot more often than other things on serious threats and on PUPs it almost always threw the red flag saying it's a serious threat which is very annoying to me.

[h3%5kr3w]

goback.. lawl! Well most of my ventures/banging head against cubicle/etc was with Norton Internet Security 2002...

I worked for Gateway as an over the phone tech repair guy. (fu&*ing worst job EVER!!! it was like Office Space X2) And when something went bad with the firewall part of things, or hell, even when trying to uninstall/reinstall it BAM! no internet in or out. It would fudge the tcp stack *98 AND XP* and with 98 sometimes repairing the tcp stack would work... most times it would not. In XP there was no choice @ the time since there was no known work around to repair the tcp stack, and it was fully intertwined within the O.S. so the only choice was to reload.

Which reminds me..... Anyone remember Gateway GoBack>>> ? That was the sorriest peice of shit software that ever roamed the hard drive world.. More specifically, the MBR world... Time got screwed up on your MTB, GoBack, made your hard drive bricked... Bad MBR file? Sorry, no hdd software fix for you, GoBack bricked it.. The only way to get GoBack off your MBR was to start the computer (from a cold boot) hold CTRL and for the love of god press G as fast as you can, and if you crossed your fingers REAALLLLYYYY tight then MAYBE you could get to the GoBack failsafe screen... Which would be great... if the end user didnt uninstall the GoBack Uninstall files in Windows.....

Blah! Gateway was a peice of shit computer... Company...

Back on topic though, I have yet to see a computer running a Norton utility that was not a super slowed computer. Maybe they have finally found the key to less resource hungry protection, but bottom line, Norton is the company who was credited by hiring the first batches of virus makers to help them in the battle... But then they pissed them off and fired them... What are they going to do? DUHHH. Make more shit that will take it down. Don't get me wrong like I said, yes they most probably have the most virus database files for removal, and albeit, I have used there miniature utilities countless times to remove viruses, but they were most of the time free giveaways to help the AV program get cleaned when it got knocked out by a virus in the first place.

[Netshroud]

Well then try a system running Norton 2009. Symantec has surprisingly pulled its socks up with this one.

[psydT0ne]

Well with Microsoft soon to be released security essentials addon for most windows platforms it will be interesting to see whether it has an impact if any on the mainstays of antivirus software.