i came here to write that
also windows defender does the job
Comment has been collapsed.
If that's all your using good luck on not getting infected. There's a vast many threats on the net and common sense only goes so far. Even some of the most trusted sites such as Yahoo, NFL.com, BBC and the New York times have been infected in the past.
Comment has been collapsed.
Does anybody browse the internet without an adblocker nowadays?
Of course. While there's a lot of people who do unfortunately there's a lot of people out there who don't even use that. There's a wide variety of people out there who just don't think about security or really pay attention to the many threats on the net... elderly, kids, people who think their pc is invulnerable etc. etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh yeah, definitely. I just kept my response security related due to the thread were commenting on.
Comment has been collapsed.
I been using AVG for years now, they been bought out by Avast a few years back I believe. I usually pay for years in advance where I got all the family computers on the plan. But I been thinking about switching to ESSET for years now if I can get a good price that covers all computers. I found ESSET to be the best one I ever tried and I have used the free scan tool through the website a few times when I suspected an infection on one of the family computers. It just seems to find more then AVG or Windows Defender in my experience. I don’t normally have issues with malware or viruses but in this day and age, it seems to be ramping up more and more. So it’s always good to have something good along with windows defender and I think ESSET has a good AV.
Comment has been collapsed.
Kaspersky , It's nice, but as people said if you are cautious you don't need anything even win Defender is enough .
It does interfere with Malwarebytes so that's the disadvantage for you.
Comment has been collapsed.
I doubt they care about you if you are not in russia, anyway there is that https://twitter.com/xxnb65/status/1501265001037795335?s=21
Comment has been collapsed.
Breached?
Kaspersky graduated from the KGB Higher School and his AV headquarters in in Moscow.
He met his wife at a KGB vacation resort.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Kaspersky
Comment has been collapsed.
Idk for me it says it's not compatible with Kaspersky and prompts me to remove it. Could be that I need to change a few settings but meh.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you use the free version it doesn't. That's just scans and doesn't conflict with an AV with active protection. Just like 2 firewalls running at the same time, 2 AVs with active protection will cause conflicts.
Comment has been collapsed.
Common sense, UBlock for my browser and Windows Defender.
Comment has been collapsed.
I mean if you don`t specifically try to infect your PC, the win defender is most likely the best.
Use VPN for work, have password manager at hand and dont download pirated porn... I don`t see any reason to get a virus with win defender.
Comment has been collapsed.
Now that you mention Win10 it dawned on me - a lot of people are still stubbornly holding against it .. Don`t know why..
But I suppose if you still use Win7, Win8 or even XP you might need an extra protection as I am not aware if win defender for those systems is up to date as well
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah if you are running older version of windows you need extra security, as most of those dont get regular secuiry updates, or in some cases, none at all.
Think win 7 got end of support at the start of 2020, as it was 10 years since it released.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're correct. It use to be pretty bad but has improved leaps and bounds over what it once was.
It's always a good idea to have a standalone scanner like the Free version of Malwarebytes just to check to make sure nothing got through Windows Defender.
Comment has been collapsed.
Win defender. done so for 10 years or so now.
Used avast before that, then realized it was a waste of money.
I do use Ublock for browser tho.
That and as mentioned earlier, common sense, just dont click every link and download just about anyting that seems off.
Comment has been collapsed.
All. Just click some extra settings if you want more or less blocked, you can also manually select something that got through. (Rarely) You want Ublock Origin the other one sold out.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bit defender. I work from home, so my work computer and my home PC are the same and data breaches would be a major liability. I ran a ransomware simulation and the standard windows defender failed quite a few tests. Bit defender passed all of them. Hopefully with that and common sense I'd be safe.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just built in Windows. I used to have Panda for years, then Avast, then I forgot but I saw recently lots of the free ones steal your data.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bit defender. They have regular sales so I just renew my yearly license whenever a good sale is available. It has been very reliable and hands off. It's an "all-in-one", so I don't feel the need to have different services for different things.
Comment has been collapsed.
In my opinion Bit Defender is the best on the market right now. Kaspersky running a close 2nd.
Comment has been collapsed.
I initially chose it because of its "no-hassle" design, and stayed with it because of the excellent performance. It gets excellent results across the board for all kinds of e-threats. I just set everything up and that was that, I completely forget it exists until it blocks something or warns me about a phishing link. It even includes a (very limited quota) free VPN. It's limited, but enough for my purposes since I only use it occasionally to access a geoblocked page.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, it's really a great program. It's a shame they don't offer a free version anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
It seems they will cease support for the Free version in June though.
They are bit dodgy about the difference with the paid version. What's been your experience of it?
I don't need a VPN and I'm just looking to replace Kaspersky until my subscription ends and I can switch to a paid AV if I feel I need it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I told about my experience some messages below. It's pretty good, I'm using the Total Security version for free, not the Antivirus Free to make it clear. Every time I go risky on the internet the firewall blocks suspicious connections and it warned me once about a jebaited program I downloaded in the past that fucked up my windows(I had the partition image to restore it). The interface is neat and simple, the level of protection can go as thorough as you want.
Comment has been collapsed.
It seems to be pretty highly rated in most independent comparative tests. The only downside seems to be it's pretty heavy on the system but I have a recent laptop so I probably won't really feel it.
Thanks for the quick review. It's always good to have user opinions because all those sites comparing software using affiliate links tend to always recommend the most expensive solutions.
Comment has been collapsed.
It really is as good as the tests indicate. I have been using it for years and it has blocked quite a few threats although I'm usually careful. I work from home and handle a lot of content under NDA, so a breach would be disastrous. I also take on projects with very extreme deadlines for better pay sometimes, so the idea of ransomware is scary. The ransomware remediation feature basically creates a backup file the moment an attempt to encrypt is detected as a failsafe then it proceeds to block the threat.
If you have a modern PC, you should be fine. I don't feel its presence resource-wise.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have looked at others but it really feel like it's the closest to what I need. I probably won't go for Total Security because I won't use most features and I have a limited budget but their other solutions look pretty handy.
Thanks for writing about your experience
Comment has been collapsed.
The Total Security version of Bitdefender compared to the free version is a LOT. It has solid ransomware protection, firewall, mic monitor, web cam protection, an anti-tracker, Wi-Fi Security advisor, secure online banking feature, VPN, password manager which as a vulnerability checker and file shredder, file encryption, network threat protection, anti-phishing, speed booster, parental control features and a great anti-theft feature which will track the device you use it on and allow you to wipe your data if you need to. It also includes free 24/7 tech support. This version supports up to 5 devices. There's also a family package which supports up to 15.
Comment has been collapsed.
It feels a bit like the Xmas tree version of their anti-virus solution. You know the kind where they keep hanging stuff on until it topples over ;)
Of all these I probably would make use of the password manager and it's included in Antivirus Plus
Comment has been collapsed.
I like iobit products. I use advanced systemcare, malware fighter, driver booster and uninstaller regularly. But i don't let them run at background. Just for when in need or weekly cleanup & updates.
For antivirus, i don't have any problems with windows defender for several years. I have used most of popular antiviruses before that. In my opinion, if it's your personal computer and (quoting the first comment) have a common sense, windows' own protection is more than enough. If it's a computer shared by a kid, grandma/pa, cafe customers...etc then maybe you can seek additional paid protections. But i don't really know the recent comparisons.
ps: I'm not a relevant technical savvy just a heavy user.
Comment has been collapsed.
Keep in mind that most if not all of "registry cleaners", "pc optimizers", or whatever these programs are called are nothing but digital snake oil, even Microsoft advise against using them:
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the reply.
I think microsoft is a side here really. It's not "even microsoft are against" but "of course microsoft is against because 3rd parties are modifying their registries". And article is mostly about possible outcomes from "unrealiable" sources. I'm not a fan or supporter of iobit. I just find them reliable and useful with me having not the highest technical capability.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can't just drop a bomb and leave with puppy eyes!
I will read it later because it would require me to research and technically understand what registry is!!
Registry cleaning is 1 of 12 care services they provide and you can uncheck it. I welcome any knowing person here not working for antivirus corps to explain why registry cleaners is "snake oil". (including you too, ormax3)
Comment has been collapsed.
I've already posted two sources, one straight from the horse's mouth with Microsoft being the developer of Windows I would think they know a thing or two about the internals of Windows and the registry...
They both explain that "registry cleaners" at best do nothing of value, but yet have all the potential to cause subtle problems by "cleaning" registry entries they have no business messing with, all in the name of so called speeding up or healing your PC NOT!
Comment has been collapsed.
No offense but you linked corporate side microsoft and another corporate side malwarebytes' blog posts. They can give an insight or an idea but not the conclusion.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't. I am using mainly microsoft tools. I am just skeptical.
Comment has been collapsed.
IT pro here who doesn't have any relationship to anti-malware/security companies, and who plays around with the registry in a corporate environment almost daily.
There are no reliable, independent studies that a registry with unnecessary keys causes significant (ie. noticeable) performance impact, nor that registry cleaners provide any significant real world performance improvement. So they are selling you an unproven "cure" for a "disease" that doesn't exist. On that basis alone it is the very definition of snake oil.
Logically it's not clear if there's any theory that registry cleaners should work at all. We know it's not a relational DB or a hash table, so it doesn't have O(1) complexity. But it seems to not quite have O(n) complexity either. It's just not documented very well. It's also completely loaded into RAM, so seek time is going to be pretty flat regardless.
Additionally, registry cleaners are not magic, they cannot possibly know for sure which keys are necessary for your system or not. So there is a very real chance of false negatives (ignoring keys that aren't needed) or false positives ("cleaning" keys that are needed). False positives won't necessarily break things, but they can still be an inconvenience or cause more harm than good. Eg. if you re-install an app that you previously uninstalled and had its registry keys removed by a cleaner, it won't recognise your previous user settings. Maybe it recreates some user files that already existed elsewhere.
Imagine if you had a game installed before that left hundreds of MB of game saves behind when you uninstalled it. Then you reinstall it after using a registry cleaner. But it doesn't pick up your existing saves because you removed the reg keys that told the game where they were, so you just start a new game and create new save files. Now you have two sets of game saves taking up storage space instead of one.
Then there is the reality that so many, maybe the vast majority, of these products are just malware or spyware in disguise, or come bundled with such crap. That includes the once revered CCleaner.
There are some tools that may provide useful functionality, they capture changes made to the registry, so that only those specific changes can be reverted. They effectively act as version control for the registry. But they need to be used beforehand, not after the fact; and their utility is more in validating application/installer behaviour or providing auditing for security/compliance reasons,, not really keeping the registry "clean" for vague "performance" reasons or just for the sake of it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Long time mac user, new-ish windows user here.
Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge, your post helped educate me to learn more. Cheers!
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the answer. I wanted to answer, but just didn't have the energy know how to explain all this stuff. About mid-night here.
Not sure if you you tried to over-simplify some of the points, or if those cases are indeed used too, which imo are bad way of using registry (the game saves)
That includes the once revered CCleaner.
Yeah, that was a bit heart breaking to learn, even though I don't use it anymore.
Also, just wanted to add. Sometimes you might want to tweak registries manually, like for fixing issues with windows, or just gain access to "hidden" windows setting, or maybe just an get an old game running. These manual edits to registries can get overridden/deleted by such tools, causing a nuisance.
PS: Just realized it was an old post. Sorry about the necro.
Comment has been collapsed.
To be clear I was talking about a scenario where the registry was used to determine the path to the game saves, not store the save data itself. While I am talking about a hypothetical scenario, I have absolutely seen various games and other software that use registry keys to specify the location of user data, and it's not that big of a leap that when you later go to reinstall that software it might set a different location (maybe the default path changed in a later version of the software, or the user changed it and forgot or something).
But yes looking back it was maybe a shitty convoluted example to demonstrate the point, being that blindly fucking with the registry (which is effectively what you're doing by trusting a tool) can have negative consequences that aren't necessarily a disaster or even obvious.
Comment has been collapsed.
have absolutely seen various games and other software that use registry keys to specify the location of user data
Well, I am not surprised.
Yeah, those tools have little to not benefit imo, and a potential risk. It's not worth using them (though, to be honest, I have used them a lot, despite being aware of the fact).
Comment has been collapsed.
common sense plus F-secure. we did use just windows defender for long, but got a free license for F-secure through my fiance's job.
Comment has been collapsed.
I highly recommend kaspersky internet security. I have used it since 2018 and its performance is excellent!
Comment has been collapsed.
I tried Mcafee and free Avast in the last couple years and they both sucked. The first kept freezing on some features, the other straight crashed with blue screen because of drivers. Maybe they werent compatible with my old pc, but I've been using Bitdefender, no ads and it has blocked both internet and virus threats for me. It's very light when the antivirus isnt set to be agressive with all the scan options on.
Comment has been collapsed.
86 Comments - Last post 20 minutes ago by Kaprime
55 Comments - Last post 27 minutes ago by Chris76de
22 Comments - Last post 44 minutes ago by Luckz
1,043 Comments - Last post 56 minutes ago by sensualshakti
1,963 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Gamy7
36 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Gamy7
16 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by m0r1arty
466 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by Noxco
18 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by lext
2,231 Comments - Last post 11 minutes ago by FallenKal
525 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by Zwolf777
147 Comments - Last post 24 minutes ago by brian14
142 Comments - Last post 36 minutes ago by MarvashMagalli
177 Comments - Last post 37 minutes ago by MarvashMagalli
what antivirus do you use - i have used melware bytes in the past and it's pretty good along side spyhunter - what do you use to protect your machines?
Comment has been collapsed.