Jump to content

Home Computer Antivirus/Malware Protection


Tayls

Recommended Posts

What are people using at the moment on their home computers to protect their devices against viruses and malware? I’ve tried a few of the main ones over the years with varying results and I’m looking at making a change to my setup.  
 

@limpid - super keen to hear from you on this!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tayls said:

What are people using at the moment on their home computers to protect their devices against viruses and malware? I’ve tried a few of the main ones over the years with varying results and I’m looking at making a change to my setup.  
 

@limpid - super keen to hear from you on this!  

All my devices run ChromeOS.  I have no need of such nonsense. Sorry.

Not sorry :mrgreen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, limpid said:

All my devices run ChromeOS.  I have no need of such nonsense. Sorry.

Not sorry :mrgreen:

Where is the windows love?! 
Ok, if you WERE to use windows, what would you have? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

Last two or three years have used Sophos ... no problems with it .... Never go near McAfee again

Read a few good things. I think one of the main cons is that it struggles a bit with malware detection?

Im tempted to go full suite, so need something that has a firewall. I’m also keen on getting a VPN and I know some companies offer it as part of their suite, although I’m not convinced they are the best - I’ll probably be better off opting for an expressvpn subscription or something. (Even though i wouldn’t be able to add this onto my existing router). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Tayls said:

Where is the windows love?! 
Ok, if you WERE to use windows, what would you have? 

I haven't used Windows in 12 years. For the dwindling Windows / MacOS estate at work we use Cisco AMP, but that's a tool suitable for corporates with a dedicated SOC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I've bothered with anything but the built in security since Windows 7. That and safe web habits do the job, without crippling the performance of your machine which was always my experience of anti-virus software.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I ask a stupid question? Just out of my own curiosity?

Why is it that windows machines seem to require these anti virus packages, but things like Chromebooks and Macs don't seem to need them?

Is it just that the latter two have inbuilt protection that suffices? Or is it something inherently wrong with Windows that means they're more susceptible? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Can I ask a stupid question? Just out of my own curiosity?

Why is it that windows machines seem to require these anti virus packages, but things like Chromebooks and Macs don't seem to need them?

Is it just that the latter two have inbuilt protection that suffices? Or is it something inherently wrong with Windows that means they're more susceptible? 

This is quite good on that. I don't think it's totally accurate, but as a simple summary it's ok....

Quote

You may have wondered why you always need to have an anti-virus on windows system but never on Linux or Mac OS systems.

read on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose I should add that (I've been told many times)  any OS could be susceptible to malware/virus, and that because most computers run windows, and most viruses are caught by users either clicking on sites with malware disguised as something seemingly legit, or via e mither attachments, it makes sense for a malicious person to write their malware for windows, rather than a Mac or Linux OS - they get the best hit rate with windows, for their virus.

Back on topic, our work computers use McAffee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blandy said:

I suppose I should add that (I've been told many times)  any OS could be susceptible to malware/virus, and that because most computers run windows, and most viruses are caught by users either clicking on sites with malware disguised as something seemingly legit, or via e mither attachments, it makes sense for a malicious person to write their malware for windows, rather than a Mac or Linux OS - they get the best hit rate with windows, for their virus.

 

Yup I think this is it, not only does Windows have the most users, almost all less technically aware people use it. That's not to say that all Windows users aren't technically aware, but you need a good reason not to use what is the de-facto standard, and so someone that's consciously made a choice to use something else probably knows what they're doing. 

I'd maintain that for a personal device there's no need for anti-virus software if you're sensible enough to not run random crap from untrusted sources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We get more malware alerts from our Mac devices than the Windows devices. There are about 4 Windows devices to each Mac.

I suspect this is mainly because our Mac users believe the bullshit that they are better protected on a Mac and so just click links and open attachments without thinking.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blandy said:

This is quite good on that. I don't think it's totally accurate, but as a simple summary it's ok....

Apart from the "Security by obscurity" bit, I'd wager Windows also suffer a bit from it's, quite frankly, legendary backwards compatibility. Meaning that the codebase is pretty large and (probably) quite messy. Leaving some old sins behind to exploit.

You can for example still run the original version of Winamp 0.2 on modern 64 bit windows. Compiled in 1997. 😲 That is pretty darn impressive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/02/2022 at 01:50, PeterSw said:

Hi,

What was your issue with McAfee just out of interest. Have their Total Protection at the minute

On my older machines ... McAfee turned them into molasses. Don't know if it was me or what. Sophos is inexpensive, I hardly notice it. I also thought their marketing is a little predatory.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, slovenian said:

If you want a top paid solution, go with ESET Internet Security (or their NOD32 Antivirus if you don't need a firewall).

There are also some top free solutions out there - Avast, Bitdefender and Kaspersky.

The problem with the free ones is that they need you to get compromised so that they can diagnose and better defend their paying (usually corporate) customers. You are acting as the tripwire at the defence perimeter.

Like the old adage, if you aren't paying, you are the product, not the customer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, limpid said:

The problem with the free ones is that they need you to get compromised so that they can diagnose and better defend their paying (usually corporate) customers. You are acting as the tripwire at the defence perimeter.

Like the old adage, if you aren't paying, you are the product, not the customer.

free products might also collect and sell your browsing data, avast and some other companies were doing it in the past... kaspersky and russian intelligence are tighthy connected, god knows what they collect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, slovenian said:

free products might also collect and sell your browsing data, avast and some other companies were doing it in the past... kaspersky and russian intelligence are tighthy connected, god knows what they collect.

A (former?) CFO of Kaspersky is a friend of a friend.

Russian intelligence agencies are running at least APT28 and APT29. They don't need the information Kaspersky could give them. If they have it, they've probably stolen it from them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â