Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Best antivirus for Windows 10


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#16 GreatGatsby

GreatGatsby

  • Members
  • 1 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:06:12 AM

Posted 27 September 2017 - 02:01 PM

Has anything changed since 3-5 years in the antivirus preferences? I've checked www.av-test.org and it looks like Avast, AVG, AVira and BitDefender are still on the top positions except for "AhnLab V3 Internet Security 9.0". What is it? Never heard of such antivirus. I personally prefer bitdefender total security 2018, not just because it's one of the most popular antivirus (can only be compared to kaspersky in my personal opinion) but in addition bitdefender provides really great discounts, eg. here is 80% off bitdefender total security 2018 http://www.softocoupon.com/coupons/bitdefender-promo-codes.php 

And according to av-comparatives.org July – November 2016 tests F-Secure is the best, then follow Avira, Bitdefender, Trend Micro and the 5-th position is Kaspersky Lab. So the question is how can be such a big discrepancy between two independent labs?



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


m

#17 Umbra

Umbra

    Authorized Emsisoft Rep


  • Members
  • 96 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:12 AM

Posted 27 September 2017 - 02:19 PM

Has anything changed since 3-5 years in the antivirus preferences? I've checked www.av-test.org and it looks like Avast, AVG, AVira and BitDefender are still on the top positions except for "AhnLab V3 Internet Security 9.0". [...] And according to av-comparatives.org July – November 2016 tests F-Secure is the best, then follow Avira, Bitdefender, Trend Micro and the 5-th position is Kaspersky Lab. So the question is how can be such a big discrepancy between two independent labs?

Because of the methodology and malware samples used, context of the test (purpose, date, duration, etc...) and the version of the security software.


Edited by Umbra, 27 September 2017 - 02:23 PM.


Emsisoft Community Manager


#18 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,915 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:12 PM

Posted 27 September 2017 - 02:29 PM

There are several reputable labs which test the effectiveness of major anti-virus programs and security suites to include AV-Comparatives.org, Virus Bulletin Comparative Tests, AV-Test.org, NSS Labs Consumer Anti-Malware Products Group Test Report, Anti-Malware Test Lab, MRG-Effitas, etc.

These kinds of comparative testing results will vary depending on a variety of factors to include but not limited to who conducted the testing, what they were testing for (type of threats, attack vectors, exploits), what versions of anti-virus software was tested, what type of scanning engine was used, and the ability to clean or repair. There are no universally predefined set of standards or criteria for testing which means each test will yield different results. As such, you need to look for detailed information about how the tests were conducted, the procedures used, objectivity and data results. Read Anti-Malware Testing Standards Organization: AMTSO Fundamental Principles of Testing.

Each security vendor uses their own testing/analysis methodology to identify various types of malware so the detection results are not always the same.

Further some of the testing criteria and standards may even be misleading.

...for some unknown reason...the renowned German test lab AV-TEST has quietly (there was no warning) modified its certification process. The changes mean that the certificates produced by the new rules are, to put it mildly, pretty useless for evaluating the merits of different AV products...With AV-TEST’s new certification standards, the onus is on the user to carefully investigate the actual results of each individual test…they may find that a product that blocked 99.9% of attacks has the same “certification” as a product that only blocked 55%.

Comparative testing: A bit of background for the uninitiated

 

And if you're dealing with zero-day malware it's unlikely the anti-virus testing is going to detect anything. It takes time for new malware to be reported, samples collected, analyzed, and tested by anti-virus/anti-malware researchers before they can add a new threat to database definitions.
 


.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#19 Knat

Knat

  • Members
  • 52 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:12 PM

Posted 28 September 2017 - 05:54 AM

 

 

And if you're dealing with zero-day malware it's unlikely the anti-virus testing is going to detect anything. It takes time for new malware to be reported, samples collected, analyzed, and tested by anti-virus/anti-malware researchers before they can add a new threat to database definitions.
 

I thought one of the tests was that the labs went to risky sites with test machines to try to pick up new malware and see if their heuristics could detect it? 

 

What do you think about the "silicone-based protection" that was in the news a while back (for the government and companies that could pay a lot). Was that any good and if so, will it make it to consumer machines? If not, will something else happen to give normal people, software designers, and anti-malware companies the edge over malware writers and hackers? 


Edited by Knat, 28 September 2017 - 05:54 AM.


#20 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,915 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:12 PM

Posted 28 September 2017 - 06:04 AM

I said antivirus was unlikely to detect zero-day malware but that does not mean it never will in all circumstances.

As for silicone-based protection...I'm not sure what you are referring to.
.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#21 Rocky Bennett

Rocky Bennett

  • Members
  • 2,259 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Mexico, USA
  • Local time:08:12 PM

Posted 28 September 2017 - 07:24 AM

 

 

 

And if you're dealing with zero-day malware it's unlikely the anti-virus testing is going to detect anything. It takes time for new malware to be reported, samples collected, analyzed, and tested by anti-virus/anti-malware researchers before they can add a new threat to database definitions.
 

I thought one of the tests was that the labs went to risky sites with test machines to try to pick up new malware and see if their heuristics could detect it? 

 

What do you think about the "silicone-based protection" that was in the news a while back (for the government and companies that could pay a lot). Was that any good and if so, will it make it to consumer machines? If not, will something else happen to give normal people, software designers, and anti-malware companies the edge over malware writers and hackers? 

 

 

 

I did a Google search for that and I came up empty, what are you talking about?

 

https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&q=silicone-based+malware+protection+&oq=silicone-based+malware+protection+&gs_l=psy-ab.3...20797.26187.0.27866.9.9.0.0.0.0.181.1232.1j8.9.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.1.181...35i39k1.0.JrvlemFOMqA


594965_zpsp5exvyzm.png


#22 Knat

Knat

  • Members
  • 52 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:12 PM

Posted 29 September 2017 - 05:05 AM

I said antivirus was unlikely to detect zero-day malware but that does not mean it never will in all circumstances.

 

Right, I was confusing. The above is good. 

 

What I was trying to ask was, the test for finding zero-day malware, is it not very useful? 

 

 

 


As for silicone-based protection...I'm not sure what you are referring to.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What do you think about the "silicone-based protection" that was in the news a while back (for the government and companies that could pay a lot). Was that any good and if so, will it make it to consumer machines? If not, will something else happen to give normal people, software designers, and anti-malware companies the edge over malware writers and hackers? 

 

 

 

I did a Google search for that and I came up empty, what are you talking about?

 

https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&q=silicone-based+malware+protection+&oq=silicone-based+malware+protection+&gs_l=psy-ab.3...20797.26187.0.27866.9.9.0.0.0.0.181.1232.1j8.9.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.1.181...35i39k1.0.JrvlemFOMqA

 

 

 

 

My bad. I spelled it incorrectly. 

 

It looks like it has gone nowhere, as I couldn't find much either, even without the terminal e. 

 

https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/catalog/ac:206732​ 

once I found the full (2 pages) at http://ids.cs.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/hardware_av.pdf but they seem to be doing maintenance just now. 

 

http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E53394_01/html/E54847/sacle.html

I recall watching a promotional video from here, and they were talking about assigning memory to programs so it couldn't be used inappropriately to hide malware so it looks legit (something I have always wondered if might be happening, and Kaspersky says they recently found). But they haven't updated their website this calendar year, so, doesn't look like it's as good (or not as saleable) as they thought previously.

 

 

So if not that, is there a way the good guys can pull ahead? Feels like I'm losing rn.



#23 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,915 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:12 PM

Posted 29 September 2017 - 05:45 AM

No amount of security software is going to defend against today's sophisticated malware writers for those who do not practice safe computing and stay informed. It has been proven time and again that the user is a more substantial factor (weakest link) in security than the architecture of the operating system or installed protection software. Cyber-criminals succeed because they take advantage of human weaknesses...relying heavily on social engineering to exploit that weak link in the security chain.

Security is all about layers and not depending on any one solution, technology or approach to protect yourself from cyber-criminals. The most important layer is you...the first and last line of defense. Security begins with personal responsibility and includes a comprehensive approach. Common sense, safe browsing habits, understanding security and following Best Practices for Safe Computing are all essential to protecting yourself from malware infection. That includes educating oneself as to the most common ways malware infection is delivered and propagated.
.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#24 Knat

Knat

  • Members
  • 52 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:12 PM

Posted 29 September 2017 - 05:50 AM

thanks. I don't have malware issues. I'm concerned with exploits. Short of getting training and a job in cybersecurity (can't do that right now, and not really in my plans), not much I personally can do about that, except report what I see and hope someone else can understand what I'm trying to say, and work out what's going wrong to cause that.



#25 Knat

Knat

  • Members
  • 52 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:12 PM

Posted 29 September 2017 - 06:00 AM

Well, I did just mention a malware problem that could be undetectable that I had thought about... but because some of those layers that are meant to find it, couldn't (though maybe they can now). 



#26 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,915 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:12 PM

Posted 29 September 2017 - 06:42 AM

If you need individual assistance with a possible malware infection, you should start a new topic in the Am I infected? What do I do? forum.

OR follow the instructions in the Malware Removal and Log Section Preparation Guide. When you have done that, start a new topic and post your logs in the Virus, Trojan, Spyware, and Malware Removal Logs forum, NOT here, for assistance by the Malware Response Team.
.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#27 Knat

Knat

  • Members
  • 52 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:12 PM

Posted 25 October 2017 - 03:03 AM

If you need individual assistance with a possible malware infection, you should start a new topic in the Am I infected? What do I do? forum.

OR follow the instructions in the Malware Removal and Log Section Preparation Guide. When you have done that, start a new topic and post your logs in the Virus, Trojan, Spyware, and Malware Removal Logs forum, NOT here, for assistance by the Malware Response Team.

 

Thanks. :) Done all that. I follow good practices. Posting a new one today as I might have found a problem. We'll see.

 

When even Verizon feels the same way, I don't think it's me. Of course I'm a person and not a business, but I honestly don't think it's as different for individuals. Might be different players, but same odds.


Edited by Knat, 25 October 2017 - 03:05 AM.


#28 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 49,915 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:10:12 PM

Posted 25 October 2017 - 05:47 AM

You're welcome and good luck.
.
.
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Windows Insider MVP 2017
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#29 Knat

Knat

  • Members
  • 52 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:12 PM

Posted 02 November 2017 - 08:52 PM

You're welcome and good luck.

thanks :grinner:



#30 santiano

santiano

  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:08:42 AM

Posted 15 November 2017 - 01:26 AM

Hello, I think Windows Defender already provides very good protection, so I'd recommend sticking with it.

 

However, if you want an alternative, take a look here: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/t/407147/answers-to-common-security-questions-best-practices/?p=2316629

I do believe that windows defender is a good shield against threats and you can accompany with that but, you can opt for other programs according to the need and coverage working area.  






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users