what is the best antivirus/antimalware/antiphish software?

Post Reply New Topic

Is it worth paying for Kapersky? All the reviews seems to suggest its the best one.

I've used Kaspersky's, Norton, Comcast Suite, Avast, Panda, AVG and a few others. I'm currently using Windows 8 which has built in virus protection. It's pretty good, too. I've had this OS since May of 2012 and it's been rock stable. Still, if I was to venture outside of it, I'd veer towards Kaspersky's. It didn't let me down in the past. Also, since these are only so-so in their anti-malware definitions, I'd also have to install Malware Bytes. As far as anti-phishing goes, I surf with IE9. It's built-in Smart Screen filter has anti-phishing and anti-malware protection. Before this starts turning into an ad for Windows 8, I'd like to point out there are issues with the system such as "disappearing" apps. Out of the blue, for instance, the music app or video app won't work and you'd have to reinstall it. This can be hard sometimes because you might find the store app doesn't work. I d/l a "reset" app which makes those things work again after a reboot. Sigh. No system's perfect.

If you have the money then buy Kaspersky. It is quite good.

Personally, I don't have the money and don't see the need to buy it. I have AVG Free Edition 2013 installed on my computers and it is good enough for me.

Malwarebytes is also good to have installed next to AVG.

Avg Is a horrible antivirus.. most viruses are talor made for it@! !

I use Avast, it seems to run smoothly most of the time and I much adore it over Avg.

It's also free.. so why not.

Microsoft Security Essentials is adequate, and I usually recommend it to everyone. It is very lightweight, and is unobtrusive. A note though before anyone tells me it's bad: there are a few anti-virus software rankings and reviews online, and Microsft Security Essentials usually fares poorly compared to other AVs in these. However, the reason why MSE fares so poorly is because it lacks heuristics scanning; it only has signature scanning. However, this means the MSE has significantly less false positives compared to other AVs, and false positives get very annoying indeed.

Heuristics scanning is the analysis of a particular program's code for anything deemed suspicous. Signature-based scanning is different. Rather, the signature-based methodology involves downloading and referencing to a large database of suspicous files when scanning. If a file appears in this list, then it is marked as dangerous or suspicous.

A side note: signature-based scanning doesn't offer protection against zero-day threats, which are recently-discovered threats or vulnerabilities in software that haven't been patched yet. But zero-day threats are easy to avoid with common sense, and with common sense and vigilance you shouldn't need an overly-complicated AV anyway.

Why use a condom when u can use a time machine?

VMWare workstation.

When done surfing pr0n, revert to snapshot and u got a clean virtual machine with your favourite OS in it