Decent free antivirus?

[RealNeil]

But it is more important to keep Windows and your security current, and avoid being "click-happy" on unsolicited downloads, links attachments, and popups.

^^^This^^^

 

[Apocalypsee]

It is true that Malwarebytes also include PUPS but out of those 252 warnings 192 of them are adware and 4 are trojans. Still my explorer eats around 30% of CPU power (eats single thread) so I still think there is some left. I run their AdwCleaner and found 33 more. Most of them are registry entry and some leftover folders oncluding two files from Windows folders. Interestingly it removed Lavasys Web Companion too. But this two programs fixed my issue and it runs on tip top condition.

But it is more important to keep Windows and your security current, and avoid being "click-happy" on unsolicited downloads, links attachments, and popups.

Prevention is better than cure for sure. But even if we be cautious of our own PC but others that uses ours might not. Murphy law comes to mind. Hence this thread.

 

[kajson]

I use Avast, though it needs some tweaking, like turning off mail signature ( insane feature), and I turn off scanning outgoing mail because I've actually spent hours once at a client figuring why he couldn't send email anymore, new OEM that was..

The big positive Avast has for me is the gaming mode / silent option, which means it never ever interrupts anything anymore you are doing. If you don't turn that on it's a horrible program. (I will never use an active virusscanner again that thinks it's ok to advertise anything at random times) I also like the software updater function which is an easy way to update virus sensitive programs like flash or java. I also run the comodo firewall.

Malwarebytes whenever I feel I might have visited questionable websites. Though I much prefer to run ADW cleaner first whenever I stumble upon an infected machine, because it is so much more time efficient then any other comparible cleaner.

 

[RealNeil]

But it is more important to keep Windows and your security current, and avoid being "click-happy" on unsolicited downloads, links attachments, and popups.

I guess this is called 'Best Practices' for a user to help avoid problems with a PC. It works too.

But even if we be cautious of our own PC but others that uses ours might not. Murphy law comes to mind. Hence this thread.

If you have kids getting online with your PC, you never really know if they're using 'Best Practices' themselves, hence the need for real-time protection. I use Webroot SecureAnywhere Anti-Virus because its extremely low overhead doesn't slow the beast down very much. Scans are fast and effective.
Also, I run the full version of Malwarebytes at the same time. Both have 'real-time' protection that does a good job.
Both of them can be found on the web for a lot less than retail at times during sales.
I need the sales because I'm running six computers here in my house and retail gets to be a lot to pay.

Malwarebytes whenever I feel I might have visited questionable websites. Though I much prefer to run ADW cleaner first whenever I stumble upon an infected machine, because it is so much more time efficient then any other comparible cleaner.

Sometimes one can be called upon by family or friends to fix a morbidly-infected PC that has slowed to a crawl.
I run the Webroot program, then Malwarebytes ADW Cleaner standalone to clean what it can. Then I install the full version of Malwarebytes onto the PC and warn the parents that it will stay clean if Junior doesn't turn-off protections while surfing the web. Sometimes they don't anymore, and sometimes they do.

It's a crapshoot.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Prevention is better than cure for sure. But even if we be cautious of our own PC but others that uses ours might not. Murphy law comes to mind. Hence this thread.

This is true but that does not mean you have to go overboard with security. If you have other users of your computers who are less disciplined at what I call "practicing safe computing", then for sure, they need to be using standard (not Administrator) user accounts.

But to that, several computers here are used by multiple users, including "invincible", "it can never happen to me", "undisciplined", "I know what I'm doing" teens and their "I know all about computers" friends. Plus there are other computers used by my guests with a variety of skills.

I don't stand over the shoulders of each, watching every move they make. But my kids and grandkids (and their friends!) sure know I can easily check my network logs to see what they've been up to!

All those systems are Windows 10, use Windows Defender (WD) plus Windows Firewall (WF) and they have Malwarebytes free on them for on-demand scanning. All users (except me) sign in with a limited Standard user account. THIS IS IMPORTANT!

None of those computers have ever been compromised, going back to 2009 when they were first setup with W7 and MSE & WF, or since 2015 when they were all migrated from W7 to W10 and WD & WF.

And of course, those systems are always kept current too.

 

[theFOoL]

Funny thing about MalwareBytes if YES it detects a lot of them BUT I also use SUPERANTISPYWARE after just to be sure

 

[Cerawy]

I've been using Avast free but my time was running out and I was getting daily nag screens so I booted it off my computer. I have windows defender and I think that it has been operating better.

I also use the Paid version of Bitdefender which is a fully integrated system.

I set it up and set to "Autopilot" and rarely hear from it, or even know it's running, except for a weekly report and a few Anti-ransomware alerts, any new program will be prevented from writing to, or modifying, any "protected" areas, until I review and allow it

As a complete system it is unlimited devices and works with Windows, MacOS, Android, and iOS devices so provides a multi-point defence against threats getting onto my systems

I also use malwarebytes and ransomfree. I think ransomefree installed the "nodrive" problem that I see when opening up file explorer the first time, didn't have it before the installation but not 100% sure.

I also don't go to dodgy web sites or open attachments to my emails from suspicious or unknown parties.

 

[John Naylor]

IMO, this is a misrepresentation because those links go to Windows 7, a 9 year old OS where mainstream support ended over 3 years ago. It does not tell the whole story.

Why would the OS with, arguably, the more dominant market share be in any way a misrepresentation ? Netmarketshare shows Win 7 having 50% more (44.40 % to 29.88 %) active installs than Win 10 ...Stat counter has them just about even (last I checked (February IIRC).

https://tinyurl.com/ycx8jftg

If you are a Win 10 user, you just have to click on the Win 10 and get the other results, certainly not beyond the capability of most forum users

And what changes ?

Kaspersky again scored 6.0 / 6.0 / 6.0
BitDefender again didn't quite do as well with 6.0 / 6.0 / 5.0
Microsoft did worse with 6.0 / 5.4 / 5.0

Avast Free - Same 6.0 / 5.5 / 5.5
AVG - Same 6.0 / 5.5 / 5.5
Norton - did worse at 6.0 / 5.0 / 5.5
Trend Micro - dropped a bit to 6.0 / 5.5 / 6.0

And let's not forget, that's January / February results. Not everyone "hits it outta the park" so to speak in every test.

However, if you don't use the internet and don't install files from media you are also safe. I visted a friend recently and I was to arrive before he got home... he said "just go inside, door's open... I haven't locked my door in 30 years unless I'm outta town for cupla days". So what is safe / unsafe... door locks, door locks and alarms.... locks, alarms and cameras. Each involves a level of better protection at increased costs.

The user has to make that judgement. So how much is your data worth ? How much are you willing to pay to have your system cleaned. I spent 9 hours cleaning my S-I-L's machine it had over 1200 infections with a "free solution". As for protection being the only consideration, I reject that notion entirely. When BD changed the management model, I went from a single download and network installs to having to download and enter information from each machine on the network, greatly increasing the time and cost of ownership. When a AV impacts the speed of our systems, this can affect one's ability to earn their living. Software installs can take up to 3 times longer with free solutions versus paid. Frequently used web sites can take 10 times as long to open than paid solutions. When AVs pick up false positives, that can mean hours of time trying to figure out where the problem is. Like insurance, it's never really important till you have a problem.

So the questions each user should answer for themselves are ...

A. Is my data worth paying $4 - $20 a seat for the "insurance" over a free solution ?
B. Is my time and reduced performance impacts worth paying $4 - $20 a seat for over a free solution ?
C. If I am going to pay for an AV, is there any reason to choose a lesser product if they cost the same ?

Regarding C, there is ... for example, AV vendors have this habit whereby you might purchase the product at a discount for say 5 seats for $19.95 ... then at renewal time, it's now $59.95. Several options ...

a. Change vendors
b. Buy new instead of renewing
c. Wait a bit.... when ya don't renew, they tend to send out 'special' offers' to get yu back.

No different from any other PC related purchases.... if two GFX cards, cost the same and one performs better than the other in performance, power usage, temps whatever, is there a logical basis for not getting the one that performs better ... sometimes there is ... I have had users pick cards based upon color or brand loyalty, but most of the time, folks make a logical choice which provides the best performance / cost ratio for their particular usage. If you are an avid gamer, that's all that is on ya PC and time is not a consideration, one could argue that using any AV is not justified since the system could be wiped reloaded in a few hours. I have 30 years of financial and project records on my PC which is all backed up. But if my system was fudged from an infection... restoring all that is a several hours of my time. And that time is worth the cost of a top notch AV utility more than 50 times over.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Why would the OS with, arguably, the more dominant market share be in any way a misrepresentation ?

I already said why. You base your entire argument on Windows 7. That does not tell the whole story. W7 is a 9 year old OS where mainstream support ended over 3 years ago. And extended support ends in less than 2 years.

As for market share, it depends on who you listen to and how they interpret and present their stats. Yes, there may still be more W7 users out there in use today, but new sales go to W10. As older systems are replaced, even Netmarketshare will be forced to admit W10 is more popular than W7. Note that StatCounter now shows Windows 10 market share increases at the expense of Windows 7.

Regardless, my point remains the same. Your claim does not tell the whole story. W7 is going away. It may go down kicking and screaming just like XP, but its fate is sealed. Everyone needs to accept that because they cannot change it.

So I say it is time to look ahead instead of clinging to the past.

As for your SIL's infected system, you are trying to imply because he used a "free solution" he got infected (with over 1200 infections! Yeah right!) and if he used a paid solution, he would not have. Bullfeathers! The best security system in the world is easily thwarted if the careless and click-happy user opens the door and lets the bad guy in.

As for protection being the only consideration, I reject that notion entirely.

Huh? Nobody in this thread ever suggested protection is the only consideration.

 

[theFOoL]

Many here think AV slows down the system. That may be true depending on the AV you use though. I just use Defender and no issues since it's built in

 

[Countryside]

In my experience i would say Avast or Bitdefender two most lightweight AVs and they both have a very good detection rate.

PS: Op you should add a Vote.

 

[bogmali]

Op you should add a Vote.

Great idea!!

Done

 

[theFOoL]

I've used AVG AVAST! and Avira over the years and now I just use Windows Defender as I know what Websites not to Enter plus I use a ADBlocker

 

[Bill_Bright]

Perhaps the title of thread should be changed too since "just an antivirus" may be confusing to some. They are all antimalware tools that look for much more than just viruses. The free program typically don't have a lot of extra "fluff" and features most users just don't need.

 

[theFOoL]

Yeah but only a few scan for both "I think?" but still using MalwareBytes and SUPERANTISPYWARE is recommended

 

[Bill_Bright]

Yeah but only a few scan for both "I think?"

No. That's part of the problem. It is not "both".

"Malware" is a catch-all term for malicious software. Malware includes viruses, Trojans, worms, rootkits, ransomware, spyware, keyloggers - any software with malicious intent. That's why programs like Avast Antivirus and Avira Antivirus claim to scan for all threats, not just viruses. And programs like Malwarebytes and other "Security" and malware programs scan for viruses too.

The difference in terms came about because in the beginning, there were separate programs for each type threat and the word "malware" was not even created yet.

but still using MalwareBytes and SUPERANTISPYWARE is recommended

Not that much. Malwarebytes yes, but not so much SAS anymore. We definitely don't need both and I don't know of any security experts who recommend both.

 

[theFOoL]

Well I just have sas for just in case MalwareBytes doesn't scan completely all the threats. It's happened before on some pc's I've done. I just use the free version of sas

 

[Bill_Bright]

Well I just have sas for just in case MalwareBytes doesn't scan completely all the threats. It's happened before on some pc's I've done. I just use the free version of sas

I think the issue there is what SAS considers a "threat". Not all "tracking cookies", for example, are threats yet SAS may tag them as threats. I see it similar to what Malwarebytes calls a PUP. "Potentially unwanted" is more an opinion rather than fact. I have had Malwarebytes tag programs I know to be safe as PUPs.

But, while "false positives" are annoying (if not automatically quarantined breaking something wanted), a false positive is better than letting a real threat that does damage slip by.

 

[Anarchy0110]

Avast and AVG serve me quite well through the years. Bitdefender is indeed moving to the Norton realm. Panda does have quite a bit of false detections.
Installing Comodo atm, gotta give it a try.

 

[Countryside]

Avast and AVG serve me quite well through the years. Bitdefender is indeed moving to the Norton realm. Panda does have quite a bit of false detections.
Installing Comodo atm, gotta give it a try.

I have used all the free AVs mentioned in this thread and the goal was to find the best detection rate and resources management and the
most lightweights are Avast , Bitdefender and Panda but Panda relies on active connection because its cloud based and dose not have a database and yes the false side needs a bit of improvement.

About the Comodo it has a decent detection but is heavy on the resource side and its compatibility with Win10 needs improvement.
AVG is fine if you are not using a weaker pc. Last year Avast acquired AVG so the lightweight should improve.

As i said before Avast or Bitdefender free are the best choices in my experiences and if you are using Win10 the Defender does a fine job but it still needs improvements of the detection side.

 

[Anarchy0110]

I have used all the free AVs mentioned in this thread and the goal was to find the best detection rate and resources management and the
most lightweights are Avast , Bitdefender and Panda but Panda relies on active connection because its cloud based and dose not have a database and yes the false side needs a bit of improvement.

About the Comodo it has a decent detection but is heavy on the resource side and its compatibility with Win10 needs improvement.
AVG is fine if you are not using a weaker pc. Last year Avast acquired AVG so the lightweight should improve.

As i said before Avast of Bitdefender free are the best choices in my experiences and if you are using Win10 the Defender does a fine job but it still needs improvements of the detection side.

Great to hear this!

 

[Bill_Bright]

Most (if not all) are cloud based now - at least in part. And that is a good thing. It allows the providers to make up-to-the-second threat information available to our scanners.

Off line scanners are nice, but don't generally have the most recent threat information.

 

[lexluthermiester]

About the Comodo it has a decent detection but is heavy on the resource side

While this is true for a default installation config, once "properly" configured it runs much better. What sells Comodo for me is the fine-grained application and firewall management. IMHO, currently the best single solution suite out there.

 

[cornemuse]

Does anyone use 360 Total Security??

 

[HammerON]

Late to the party, but I suggest Windows Defender to friends and use it for my builds.