Post by: noisyturtle on Thu, 06 August 2020, 17:39:15
What do you use and what other antivirus/security software have you used that you loved or hated?
Post by: -Jerry- on Thu, 06 August 2020, 18:07:03
We ran Sophos across the estate at work, but found that Defender preformed equally well, for less money and at a lower performance penalty.
Post by: captain on Thu, 06 August 2020, 18:08:36
Tapatalk steals money then adds ads back in and demands more money!
Post by: fohat.digs on Thu, 06 August 2020, 18:27:13
Post by: noisyturtle on Thu, 06 August 2020, 18:48:32
Malwarebytes has been my main thing, and Windows built-in anti-virus has seemed to work pretty well. That said, I don't visit a lot of dangerous hot spots.
I had a bad experience with them where I was unable to uninstall or get MWB to stop running actively in the background. It was preventing me from being able to reboot because it wouldn't shutdown and it would not allow an uninstall. I forgot what the solution was, but I swore I'd never use it again.
Post by: fohat.digs on Thu, 06 August 2020, 19:10:34
Post by: 1391401 on Thu, 06 August 2020, 21:21:20
I use Chrome Browser or some form of Chromium Browser on all machines and install the typical privacy / adblocking extensions day one.
I use pihole and whatever the anti-malware cloudflare dns is.
For windows (gaming) I just use windows defender. I do little browsing and almost no downloading of non-games in windows.
For linux I think I played around with clamav a few times mostly just so I knew how it worked incase I encountered it in the wild.
A lot of what I do is to minimize ads / bloat on the net but I think that combined with smart browsing patterns (no I didn't win that ipad) probably keep me pretty safe.
Post by: Leslieann on Thu, 06 August 2020, 22:15:54
We ran Sophos across the estate at work, but found that Defender preformed equally well, for less money and at a lower performance penalty.
That's a false equivalency.
"I left my doors open and no one broke in so clearly I don't need to lock my doors." Just because it didn't happen at that time or you had no idea it happened doesn't mean it's just as good.
I've also mentioned this before... All your eggs are in one basket.
If you crack Defender you crack Windows and since every Widows has Defender how large a target is it for hackers? Massive. This was an issue when Norton was on everything, if you broke Norton you had access to millions of systems, and it did happen, multiple times. It's only a matter of time before it happens again. And then there is the fact that it's Microsoft, who is know for shelving exploits unless it's a problem. Why? Because fixing them costs money.
Want more proof it's a screwed up system?
Why do you even need Defender? If MS knows of an exploit why not fix it instead of using Defender? Why do you need protection for a system they themselves make, does that make any sense at all? Defender wouldn't exist if MS did their job right so why are you trusting those same people to do this right?
Don't rely on Defender,
I'm not saying AVs are good, they pretty much all suck to be honest, but relying on Defender is basically just saying f'it.
Sorry, Jerry, I didn't mean to pick on you specifically, your post was just the one that prompted this.
Post by: noisyturtle on Thu, 06 August 2020, 22:21:19
You'd think by now there would be some incredible open source independently developed option
Post by: Leslieann on Thu, 06 August 2020, 23:33:41
Certainly having WinDef and a 3rd party antivirus is the best betAlmost all AV definitions come from one company and without the money to get access to that data you won't be as effective.
You'd think by now there would be some incredible open source independently developed option
This also happens to be why one tends to not be much better than any other, the variances depend on how fast they get out new definitions. It's also why they all want to sell you a suite of security instead of just an AV, it's the only way to set themselves apart.
I'm sure some wonder why if they all use the same samples and definitions why isn't Defender a good choice? It goes back to targeting and all your eggs in one basket. Every Win10 install has it so if you target Win10 you have to target Defender, once you defeat that the rest of Windows doesn't have a chance.
Post by: -Jerry- on Fri, 07 August 2020, 01:47:36
That's a false equivalency.
"I left my doors open and no one broke in so clearly I don't need to lock my doors." Just because it didn't happen at that time or you had no idea it happened doesn't mean it's just as good.
I thought of it more as a ‘if work think it’s good enough, it probably is’ along with tests showing it had equal coverage. More recent tests appear to suggest that’s no longer the case, now that I do some research, and your point about the fragility of a wide base is valid so I will therefore adjust my solution. Thank you ^-^
Sorry, Jerry, I didn't mean to pick on you specifically, your post was just the one that prompted this.
Better a sacrificial goat than a schmuck ;)
Post by: Leslieann on Fri, 07 August 2020, 22:24:28
I thought of it more as a ‘if work think it’s good enough, it probably is’ along with tests showing it had equal coverage. More recent tests appear to suggest that’s no longer the case, now that I do some research, and your point about the fragility of a wide base is valid so I will therefore adjust my solution. Thank you ^-^
{cut}
Better a sacrificial goat than a schmuck ;)
Your work also may have a network wide anti-virus.
And thanks for understanding. :)
Post by: -Jerry- on Sat, 08 August 2020, 01:08:48
Your work also may have a network wide anti-virus.
I mostly only get endpoint reports and it’s usually undergrads being injudicious with where they stick their USB sticks, so only see stuff from Defender via Security Centre. We have all the appliances you’d expect of a large network though, without going into specifics, so yes, there is that as well.
Post by: tp4tissue on Sat, 08 August 2020, 15:07:57
Post by: Sintpinty on Sun, 09 August 2020, 21:26:10
Post by: captain on Sun, 09 August 2020, 22:05:54
Tapatalk steals money then adds ads back in and demands more money!
Post by: Leslieann on Mon, 10 August 2020, 00:10:17
Ah, COMPUTER viruses! I just stay off the dark’net and don’t run much pirated software.That's not how it works.
One reason anti-virus became sort of a meh software was not because of Defender or Microsoft Security Essentials, it became largely irrelevant due to drive-by infections and side loaded malware.
Viruses in general are less popular today due to the cloud and email being used less (one of the larger infection points in the past), traditional viruses only account for about 3% of malware today. Drive-bys are done with ads, you don't have to click, all you have to do is see some of these and you get hit*. Most of these are purged when the browser is closed (Chrome never really closes), but a few can get their hooks into you and hang on.
Anti-virus has had to change, the problem is they often argue over who's responsibility it is, sure an AV scans files and email, but who should be blocking malicious ads and who decides what's malicious? Do you also scan for malicious browser extensions and side loaded apps, companies have been sued over this. Funny how they can argue over who should protect against what but they all sure as heck scan for pirated software, with some not allowing you add an exemption or even disable the scanner. False positive? Aww too bad. Testing software, Oh well. I stopped recommending two major AV vendors over this behaviour, I refuse to let my computer or my customers computers be held hostage to them.
*Ad companies complain about adblockers (the most effectively way to stop drive-by infections), some claiming they are immoral and one even pushing for legislation to ban them. Google almost did but I think they realized how many would head to Firefox if they did, which would have been an even bigger disaster. Keep in mind, not once have IO heard of them paying to clean up an infection they caused so until they clean up their own act and are willing to pay to clean up my computer due to something they allowed onto their network they can take a long walk off a short pier, preferably into shark infested waters.
Post by: tp4tissue on Mon, 10 August 2020, 04:54:15
Drive-bys are done with ads, you don't have to click, all you have to do is see some of these and you get hit*. Most of these are purged when the browser is closed (Chrome never really closes), but a few can get their hooks into you and hang on.
Are any of these capable of busting through VM ?
Post by: Maledicted on Mon, 10 August 2020, 10:01:57
Tp4 just use dat Avast, cuz it's free.. and Tp4 needs all the money for gambling.
That's what I have used on every one of my personal computers, for years and years. The real-time protection is great. I have never needed it on my own systems, but the boot time scanner has come in handy as well.
I discounted Malwarebytes entirely for many years, but it appears that it has a real-time scanner now ... if you pay for it? If there's no real-time scanner, there's no reason to even have it besides for removal once you're already infected, if you ask me. I prefer to never get to that point to begin with.
Post by: Leslieann on Mon, 10 August 2020, 21:34:01
Tp4 just use dat Avast, cuz it's free.. and Tp4 needs all the money for gambling.Avast is one of the ones I talked about above who held the system hostage by not actually turning off.
AVG refused to shut down background protection when I demanded it, Avast later bought AVG and then pulled the same stunt.
I needed to copy an infected file and they absolutely refused to allow that to happen even when I turned it "off", I had to uninstall both to make it happen.
Unacceptable.
I get it, the average user doesn't know how to deal with this stuff, but when you turn it off, it should turn off.
Post by: Leslieann on Mon, 10 August 2020, 21:54:50
Drive-bys?Drive-bys are done with ads, you don't have to click, all you have to do is see some of these and you get hit*. Most of these are purged when the browser is closed (Chrome never really closes), but a few can get their hooks into you and hang on.Are any of these capable of busting through VM ?
Probably not, if you have VT enabled and use the same OS as the guest (giving it the best chance) it may be theoretically possible, but most are pretty limited in capabilities. It's more likely to jump shared folders, however in this case it would still need execution.
Most virtualization happens on the server and if you're out cruising around online using the company hosting server you need to find a new line of work, might I suggest corporate sabotage. Making a drive-by to take advantage of it would be pretty pointless.
Post by: JayZz on Tue, 11 August 2020, 11:48:05
Post by: Darthbaggins on Tue, 11 August 2020, 14:10:00
Post by: sharktastica on Tue, 11 August 2020, 16:15:05
Speaking more broadly than just viruses, I find that the best way to get away from relying on victory in the arms race between malicious programs and defences against them is to not occur such malicious programs in the first place. Sounds precarious, and of course, not everyone is 'streetwise' with using the internet... But I would say that in this day and age (and related to Leslieann's very valid point), having a modern web browser (ie, not IE) with sandboxing, good adblocker (I use uBlock Origin) and aggressive JavaScript policy will in fact grant a lot of protection by hiding things that you might unwittingly click or code that might steer you towards downloading a Pandora's Box of craptastical computer corruption. And if that doesn't work and you've been vectored by a 'classical' style of virus, then the two software I listed for Windows are good enough in my experience. I know that paid suites may have useful features for non tech-savvy people and I believe most get more frequent definitions updates, but I am not of that group and I'm purposely cheap with software to fund my hardware and keyboards.
In the past, I've used paid versions AVG, Avast, and Kaspersky at some point. My experience with them is at least 7 or so years out of date since I became cheap as aforementioned, but I never had terrible experiences with any of them but they were all quite bloated.
Post by: Leslieann on Tue, 11 August 2020, 22:11:16
not everyone is 'streetwise' with using the internet...If they were, 90% of techs would be out of work.
having a modern web browser (ie, not IE) with sandboxing, good adblocker (I use uBlock Origin)That alone cuts probably 80-90% of the garbage right there.
Beware though, once you use a good adblocker you won't be able to go back. I absolutely can't stand using the internet without one anymore, it's amazing the difference. The internet is a cesspool of ads.
Post by: Maledicted on Wed, 12 August 2020, 10:21:58
In the past, I've used paid versions AVG, Avast, and Kaspersky at some point. My experience with them is at least 7 or so years out of date since I became cheap as aforementioned, but I never had terrible experiences with any of them but they were all quite bloated.
Does the free version of Malwarebytes finally have a real-time scanner? I refuse to consider it an antivirus until it does. Was Avast already bloated 7 years ago? I think it is certainly still much better than most, even with its irritating nag popups telling you to upgrade. I miss the days of its original GUI, the one that looked like a stylized media player. It was so well optimized then.
not everyone is 'streetwise' with using the internet...If they were, 90% of techs would be out of work.having a modern web browser (ie, not IE) with sandboxing, good adblocker (I use uBlock Origin)That alone cuts probably 80-90% of the garbage right there.
Beware though, once you use a good adblocker you won't be able to go back. I absolutely can't stand using the internet without one anymore, it's amazing the difference. The internet is a cesspool of ads.
Yup, on all counts. Ublock Origin misses some here and there too though, and consumes more system resources than if most ads were filtered out by a Pi-hole setup first.
Post by: sharktastica on Wed, 12 August 2020, 12:26:27
If they were, 90% of techs would be out of work.True, but that shouldn't stop education IMO.
Beware though, once you use a good adblocker you won't be able to go back. I absolutely can't stand using the internet without one anymore, it's amazing the difference. The internet is a cesspool of ads.Ditto.
Does the free version of Malwarebytes finally have a real-time scanner? I refuse to consider it an antivirus until it does. Was Avast already bloated 7 years ago? I think it is certainly still much better than most, even with its irritating nag popups telling you to upgrade. I miss the days of its original GUI, the one that looked like a stylized media player. It was so well optimized then.It doesn't, and I agree with your assessment. But it works well as strictly an anti-malware scanner that doesn't fight Windows Defender. IIRC, the bloat was coming but again, it's been so long I don't completely remember other than it wasn't a completely terrible experience.
Yup, on all counts. Ublock Origin misses some here and there too though, and consumes more system resources than if most ads were filtered out by a Pi-hole setup first.I love Pi-hole! But from a mass consumer standpoint, if there's an ongoing struggle to get people using adblockers on their current browsers, what hope is there for them to buy a Raspberry Pi or old laptop to run Linux on and set Pi-hole up.
Post by: Maledicted on Wed, 12 August 2020, 19:56:02
Does the free version of Malwarebytes finally have a real-time scanner? I refuse to consider it an antivirus until it does. Was Avast already bloated 7 years ago? I think it is certainly still much better than most, even with its irritating nag popups telling you to upgrade. I miss the days of its original GUI, the one that looked like a stylized media player. It was so well optimized then.It doesn't, and I agree with your assessment. But it works well as strictly an anti-malware scanner that doesn't fight Windows Defender. IIRC, the bloat was coming but again, it's been so long I don't completely remember other than it wasn't a completely terrible experience.
Yes, fair. I have used Malwarebytes before on systems I already know are infected. It does a great job there. I seem to generalize the more popular antiviruses as being bloated. Norton certainly is the freaking antichrist in that regard, and my perception has always been that McAfee sucks in that regard too, but I'm used to seeing this on students' personal computers that have seen little-to-no maintenance for 5+ years straight, were often bottom-of-the-barrel even when they got them, and may even be infected anyway since half of them don't even know what an antivirus is and a huge chunk of them let the free trial that likely came pre-installed on their system lapse God-knows-how-long-ago. We use Kaspersky at work, which has always seemed very efficient, although it has its quirks. I tried to get them to go for the free Avast licenses and support for education but was shot down. Kaspersky has some wonderful management tools, so it makes sense.
Yup, on all counts. Ublock Origin misses some here and there too though, and consumes more system resources than if most ads were filtered out by a Pi-hole setup first.I love Pi-hole! But from a mass consumer standpoint, if there's an ongoing struggle to get people using adblockers on their current browsers, what hope is there for them to buy a Raspberry Pi or old laptop to run Linux on and set Pi-hole up.
There's 0 hope of that, but we've got quite a lot of tech people on here. Back when we were still allowing students to install extensions a year or so ago, I would still most commonly see adblock plus, and even that was uncommon. Ublock Origin was a unicorn.
Post by: Maledicted on Wed, 12 August 2020, 19:56:33
Does the free version of Malwarebytes finally have a real-time scanner? I refuse to consider it an antivirus until it does. Was Avast already bloated 7 years ago? I think it is certainly still much better than most, even with its irritating nag popups telling you to upgrade. I miss the days of its original GUI, the one that looked like a stylized media player. It was so well optimized then.It doesn't, and I agree with your assessment. But it works well as strictly an anti-malware scanner that doesn't fight Windows Defender. IIRC, the bloat was coming but again, it's been so long I don't completely remember other than it wasn't a completely terrible experience.
Yes, fair. I have used Malwarebytes before on systems I already know are infected. It does a great job there. I seem to generalize the more popular antiviruses as being bloated. Norton certainly is the freaking antichrist in that regard, and my perception has always been that McAfee sucks in that regard too, but I'm used to seeing this on students' personal computers that have seen little-to-no maintenance for 5+ years straight, were often bottom-of-the-barrel even when they got them, and may even be infected anyway since half of them don't even know what an antivirus is and a huge chunk of them let the free trial that likely came pre-installed on their system lapse God-knows-how-long-ago. We use Kaspersky at work, which has always seemed very efficient, although it has its quirks. I tried to get them to go for the free Avast licenses and support for education but was shot down. Kaspersky has some wonderful management tools, so it makes sense.
Yup, on all counts. Ublock Origin misses some here and there too though, and consumes more system resources than if most ads were filtered out by a Pi-hole setup first.I love Pi-hole! But from a mass consumer standpoint, if there's an ongoing struggle to get people using adblockers on their current browsers, what hope is there for them to buy a Raspberry Pi or old laptop to run Linux on and set Pi-hole up.
There's 0 hope of that, but we've got quite a lot of tech people on here. Back when we were still allowing students to install extensions a year or so ago, I would still most commonly see Adblock Plus, and even that was uncommon. Ublock Origin was a unicorn.
Post by: Leslieann on Wed, 12 August 2020, 22:22:05
Use Adguard DNS, plug these into your router DNS settings. Not as good as pihole but with ublock and this it's pretty close.
176.103.130.130
176.103.130.131
Post by: Maledicted on Thu, 13 August 2020, 09:43:22
You don't need a pihole to reduce the load.
Use Adguard DNS, plug these into your router DNS settings. Not as good as pihole but with ublock and this it's pretty close.
176.103.130.130
176.103.130.131
That's tempting for the time being, since I am not even using my Pi and pfSense box at the moment, just a cheap old TP-Link router I have had for ages. A free service that helps you block ads you would normally see on free services is beautifully ironic.
I hadn't heard of AdGuard DNS, thank you.
Post by: tp4tissue on Sat, 15 August 2020, 10:26:21
Post by: Maledicted on Sat, 15 August 2020, 17:23:08
Trying out this adguard dns, how do I know it's working though?
I'm using it at home already now. It seems to work pretty well. I know it is blocking all of the ads in my mother's solitaire "app", which were previously only blocked by Pi-hole when I still had it up and running. There are adblocker test pages as well. google it and try a few. I noticed that Adguard left the advertisement elements in the page on the one I quickly tested with, but they were unpopulated. Turning Ublock origin back on after testing removed what remained, which is part of the reason I usually use Pi-hole in conjunction with the Ublock Origin extension, to grab whatever may slip through the cracks.
What I really should do is try casting Youtube to my tv some more, since there's basically no way to block those ads without a DNS solution.
Post by: tp4tissue on Sun, 16 August 2020, 07:41:10
Post by: SBJ on Sun, 16 August 2020, 10:27:36
Post by: yui on Thu, 27 August 2020, 05:06:51
avast, but since they added that keylogger i do not trust them anymore.
AVG, but it was not that great.
Comodo, do not install their browser but the antivirus is actually good.
ClamWin, probably one of the worse at detecting "virus" but no shady company behind it.
Windows Defender, from the test i saw probably not much better than clamwin but with a much shadier company behind it.
Malwarbyte, only ever used it as a 2nd antimalware when i had doubt about my main one, seemed pretty good at the time better than AVG.
Avira, seems to work fairly decently, detects web ad based "virus" in memory somewhat regularly.
FortiClient, seems to actually not be as good at detecting resident stuff in memory than Avira.
And on linux i only used avast and Comodo as proper AV, with the lack of downloading executable from random sources i never had any detect anything, i am not quite sure if a proper antivirus is even needed with either SElinux or AppArmor
and the is a youtube channel specialized in testing AV, i think it is the PC Security Channel, may want to give a look https://www.thepcsecuritychannel.com/tests
and yeah TP VMs are not the be all end all of security, pretty much all of the intel security flaws can be accessed from inside VM in javascript as is row-hammer, so getting out of the VM and loading into system memory is at least in theory possible.
Are any of these capable of busting through VM ?
Post by: Kavik on Thu, 27 August 2020, 13:09:40
I think an adblocker is probably one of the best ways to avoid junk though. I've been using an adblocker for so long that I'm always very surprised what websites look like when I see them without one. How do people even use the Internet without one? Even legitimate websites have fake (or at least deceptive) download links sometimes or crap that pops into the exact spot I want to click as I'm clicking.
Post by: SVanE on Wed, 02 September 2020, 15:23:54
Sendt fra min SM-G950F med Tapatalk
Post by: Leslieann on Wed, 02 September 2020, 23:13:39
I don`t use it at all.Not only is this wrong but you're basing it on bad information.
I think that it is possible to maintain pc without antivirus if you are not watching trash like porn,drug and gun websites and ESPECIALLY YOU ARE NOT following weird links. To check whether link is safe you must click on it with a right mouse button and go for the last option. Then you should use google for acknowledging if that link is safe or not. :-*
Porn is actually now one of the safest places online.
Years ago porn sites were terrible but they got tired of that reputation and actually got together and formed a coalition to vet advertisers, as such they became one of the safest ad networks online. Churches and small forums on the other hand have become a haven for getting viruses. Most church websites are run by volunteers who know nothing of online security and will accept any ad money offered. Internet security doesn't follow conventional norms. It used to be hackers did what people thought but automation has made that thinking pointless. You cannot hide through obscurity, that little mom and pop website no one would care to hack is now seen as an easy target and with automation and A.I. it's really easy to find and attack them.
Your "weird links" idea, same issue. Spammers and hackers have gotten wise to this, what, did you think they wouldn't? And now do all they can to obscure that, which is actually pathetically easy. And Google is not the end-all be-all authority on security, in fact they're one of the worst. They have almost zero human oversight on anything so when there is something missed or misidentified it can be quiet difficult to get it into or out of the system. Worse, once the scammers figure out how to bypass it it's a free-for-all, which is why CAPTCHA keeps having to change.
You are actually the worst person in terms of safety, you know more than enough to be dangerous but you don't yet realize how much you don't know.
I'll simply finish with this...
How do you know your system is clean? You've effectively buried your head in the sand. Now if you were on Linux or Mac I could dismiss what you say, on them, that method of security actually works fine, but not on Windows. Windows has far, far too big a target on it's back along with Swiss Cheese security and a dumpster fire of an update system all handled by a company who really doesn't even care enough to properly test their updates.
Post by: yui on Thu, 03 September 2020, 00:56:25
I don`t use it at all.true 5 to 10 years ago, no longer true, most of the **** you can get online nowadays is through JavaScript adverts on legitimate pages, so link checking is useless as the site itself is safe, just the ads on it are not, and by only loading the site you get infected (no need to click anything) as Leslieann said, porn is way too big for that to fly as should be google adsence but smaller ad agencies may fall/have fallen for it, still phishing links exist but are becoming rarer. and download and run viruses are almost non existent anymore. this is why anti viruses are important, and actually even on linux and mac, although less so with their much tighter security, as javascript, specter-like attacks and rowhammer are cross platform
I think that it is possible to maintain pc without antivirus if you are not watching trash like porn,drug and gun websites and ESPECIALLY YOU ARE NOT following weird links. To check whether link is safe you must click on it with a right mouse button and go for the last option. Then you should use google for acknowledging if that link is safe or not. :-*
Post by: greys on Mon, 07 September 2020, 05:59:22
Post by: SmoothFaces on Sun, 29 November 2020, 19:27:40
Post by: dgneo on Sun, 29 November 2020, 20:49:04
Post by: noorejji on Mon, 30 November 2020, 01:15:21
Jokes aside, I mainly filter web content as much as I can without breaking the pages. Both for security, privacy and sanity. With development moving so fast it’s hard to keep up on the latest, and it’s just depressing most of the time. Some amount of risk is inevitable when using the web. I’ve been thinking about using a Mac Mini for browsing and other light usage, but that’s a bit expensive right.
Post by: Darthbaggins on Mon, 07 December 2020, 11:24:23
Post by: el_murdoque on Wed, 09 December 2020, 08:00:54
Post by: PTRS on Tue, 22 December 2020, 01:18:12
i dont click in sus links or download apps from no name websites
Post by: Leslieann on Tue, 22 December 2020, 01:26:45
Windows Defender+brainAhhh, the good ol' Ostrich approach.
i dont click in sus links or download apps from no name websites
Yeah, that doesn't work.
Post by: yui on Tue, 22 December 2020, 06:26:40
realistically nothing actually just works, i use 2 antiviruses + noscript and yet still got infected by a miner by connecting to a friend network, neither antivirus detected it, just the pc went rather slow and hot, and low and behold a process running 99% cpu at all time.Windows Defender+brainAhhh, the good ol' Ostrich approach.
i dont click in sus links or download apps from no name websites
Yeah, that doesn't work.
Windows defender is rather bad but still better than nothing.
Post by: Leslieann on Tue, 22 December 2020, 07:27:31
Windows defender is rather bad but still better than nothing.It's not better than nothing, it IS nothing.
Any attacker hacking Win10 will attack Defender at the same time as the os because they have to since it's integral to the system. It's not added security, it's baked in, it's the default. It's the same as relying on Win7 and Windows 8 stock security, all they did was add a fancy name to it. Is it safer than Win7 and Win8, well I would hope so considering those are 8 and 10 years old. If it wasn't better it means they learned nothing about security since.
You have been sold a bag of B.S.
Post by: yui on Tue, 22 December 2020, 08:02:36
Post by: Leslieann on Tue, 22 December 2020, 08:31:06
against targeted attacks, nothing does anything, against automated attacks it does at least blocks what it knows to be malware, it is why i do consider it as above nothing, with nothing you can get infected by even the oldest and simplest viruses, so yes i do agree that it is not enough to be safe, but then nothing is so where do you draw the line?Blocks malware?
What kind of an idiot malware maker ignores the basic default OS protection? Who's it going to infect?
Post by: yui on Tue, 22 December 2020, 08:34:29
well every older malware that existed before it, and peoples aiming for older machines, that have not been updated because too important to have downtime for update, or idiots that disable it outright because it make the pc slower, the number of potential infection is smaller but not 0 and some can be rather juicy.against targeted attacks, nothing does anything, against automated attacks it does at least blocks what it knows to be malware, it is why i do consider it as above nothing, with nothing you can get infected by even the oldest and simplest viruses, so yes i do agree that it is not enough to be safe, but then nothing is so where do you draw the line?Blocks malware?
What kind of an idiot malware maker ignores the basic default OS protection? Who's it going to infect?
Post by: yqqdrasil on Tue, 22 December 2020, 14:03:23
I don't think I've used a single AV, not even MWB or CCleaner in over a decade. I just don't download sketchy stuff/click on random links.
Post by: yui on Wed, 23 December 2020, 02:04:34
When I was younger I remember trying a few AVs like Norton and McAfee but got super annoyed with the updates and notifications to purchase ****.CCleaner will do absolutely nothing against any malware, not its job, and well your computer will, without you asking it, download stuff from sites you never heard off, those things are called adverts, and can be compromised to contain a payload, so you will browse a completely normal and safe site (ex. The Guardian or any site with ads) and randomly can get infected with no fault from the site or you, well some fault from you for running no AV but not the point, only because the advertisement agency did not properly check the ads (and it does somewhat happen often, even did to google not too long ago).
I don't think I've used a single AV, not even MWB or CCleaner in over a decade. I just don't download sketchy stuff/click on random links.
there exist some free AV that are less intrusive with asking you to buy, from my experience Comodo is pretty good with not being too annoying(although have not used it in years so maybe has changed) and ClamAV is an opensource AV engine that does not have any paid version, but it is kinda meh, it was built to check emails not run continuous on a pc, but still better than having nothing at all.
Post by: yqqdrasil on Wed, 23 December 2020, 11:32:16
I'm also aware you can get infected from no fault of your own, but I still don't see any free AVs protecting you from something like that. I might be wrong, maybe you've been saved numerous times by adding that extra layer of protection.
Post by: Leslieann on Wed, 23 December 2020, 21:00:40
I'm also aware you can get infected from no fault of your own, but I still don't see any free AVs protecting you from something like that. I might be wrong, maybe you've been saved numerous times by adding that extra layer of protection.Web pages can link to hundreds of sites in the background.
How modern AV's protect you against a lot of that stuff is not with a patch, it's with proxies, firewalls and DNS, they simply block your system from contacting it in the first place. This is why Norton and others started implementing firewalls into their products and became more invasive. Your browser also more than likely also does some of this and it's probably saved you far more times than you will ever know. You can also use these systems to act as a privacy system to hide from your ISP as well as get access to these dns systems without using the AV, adguard is a popular one.
AVs do however block certain code from running and it's not just that they block code, they they can block different code. While many AV makers share a database of exploits, most also run their own independent labs analyzing and finding ways to block this stuff so not all are created equal. Some gain protection for exploits earlier than others, some do not block as much older stuff... They all have their pros and cons.
Fire up something like Ublock Origin and Privacy Badger and then hit up a few random websites, better yet, hit up popular news sites and take a look and see just how many different domains your browser is accessing without you knowing, not to mention how many companies are tracking you. I've seen websites have 250 blocked items on a singe page, I've also had a website hit me with 700 cookies for tracking purposes.
Post by: yqqdrasil on Thu, 24 December 2020, 00:56:37
I've had piHole running for almost a year though.. I haven't logged into the admin interface since I installed it so I don't know if theres any interesting analystics to see there, but it does a pretty good job, especially on mobile devices where there aren't much options for adblockers (especially iOS devices).
Post by: yui on Thu, 24 December 2020, 04:57:24
Yes I'm aware CCleaner isn't that type of program, I was just making the point that I don't use programs like that to 'Protect against x' or 'Increase performance' etc.i have a few times ran into bad adverts on good site that had gotten blocked by one of my AV, it is somewhat rare though, and well it was blocked so i do not know what it would have done
I'm also aware you can get infected from no fault of your own, but I still don't see any free AVs protecting you from something like that. I might be wrong, maybe you've been saved numerous times by adding that extra layer of protection.
Fire up something like Ublock Origin and Privacy Badger and then hit up a few random websites, better yet, hit up popular news sites and take a look and see just how many different domains your browser is accessing without you knowing, not to mention how many companies are tracking you. I've seen websites have 250 blocked items on a singe page, I've also had a website hit me with 700 cookies for tracking purposes.and i tried to run privacy badger but it never seemed to do much, although it may be because noscript was also running, i have seen sites with about 250 blocked domains in noscripts, only once mind you and i do not remember what it was... and my noscript is set up so that it blocks everything by default, and i add exceptions as i go, so even some of googles domains are still blocked
and yeah pihole will help, but it only is a blacklist, if something is not in it it becomes useless (like windows defender)
Post by: andy55 on Wed, 06 January 2021, 12:22:40
Post by: Leslieann on Wed, 06 January 2021, 21:46:01
and i tried to run privacy badger but it never seemed to do much, although it may be because noscript was also running, i have seen sites with about 250 blocked domains in noscripts, only once mind you and i do not remember what it was... and my noscript is set up so that it blocks everything by default, and i add exceptions as i go, so even some of googles domains are still blockedPrivacy Badger doesn't work like any of the others, it notices extraneous sites that track you and after it sees it a third time it then blocks it but it only works after Ublock, Noscript and Pihole have been used.
If you already use a whitelist then PB will not do anything for you. Ublock also should also be almost useless.
Post by: yui on Thu, 07 January 2021, 00:45:13
If you already use a whitelist then PB will not do anything for you. Ublock also should also be almost useless.well then yeah it is why it was doing a whole lot of nothing :) i thought it would run before noscript as i installed it before it but seems like it does not. although even with noscript ublock still does some work, especially on youtube where is sometimes blocks 2k+ ads, my pc is too old for all those ads...
Post by: shortdog6 on Wed, 20 January 2021, 22:33:01
Post by: DELLA KEY on Wed, 14 April 2021, 19:08:42
Post by: BlueberryIsHere on Fri, 04 June 2021, 07:41:01
Post by: kizuna on Sun, 13 June 2021, 07:51:29
Post by: sapisoi on Thu, 15 July 2021, 12:42:14
Post by: foxieze on Fri, 23 July 2021, 16:35:29
Post by: rowdy on Fri, 23 July 2021, 18:37:45
Not really using any AV at the moment as switched to Arch Linux a little while back, and just relying on the fact there is a very minimal amount of virus targeting Linux systems.
Just as long as you install security updates regularly ...
Post by: Leslieann on Fri, 23 July 2021, 23:02:14
Post by: geauxflying on Wed, 04 August 2021, 20:22:22
Post by: ollir_ on Thu, 19 August 2021, 06:44:19
Post by: rowdy on Sat, 21 August 2021, 03:39:24
Moderna
Aha.
Ahahaha.
Ha.
Post by: SBJ on Sat, 21 August 2021, 03:49:58
So far no problems. :)
Post by: yui on Mon, 23 August 2021, 06:22:37
Not really using any AV at the moment as switched to Arch Linux a little while back, and just relying on the fact there is a very minimal amount of virus targeting Linux systems.from my experience it seems like most big linux distros have some kind of virus/malware detecting and mitigation out of the box anyhow, with strong firewalls, LXC, apparmor etc. and with most virus squarely targeted at windows it makes it safer, still JS malware is completely portable often across all OS and architectures, so still not foolproof (JS or other web based vectors are somewhat popular because they can attack anything, from phones to cars to desktop to fridges with no discrimination)
oh and i came across qubesOS, a security through virtualization oriented distro, can be interesting.
Post by: Burgo on Tue, 31 August 2021, 20:45:21
Post by: Leslieann on Tue, 31 August 2021, 23:48:39
still JS malware is completely portable often across all OS and architectures, so still not foolproof (JS or other web based vectors are somewhat popular because they can attack anything, from phones to cars to desktop to fridges with no discrimination)Stuff like that has faaaaar less ability on Linux and even Mac compared to what it does with Windows or phones.
The trouble with Windows and phones is app control is minimal and it can ride that app's permissions, and since few actually close programs or reboots (and Chrome likes to restore your session, once it's in it will be there a looong time just hoovering info. The worst for this is probably Chrome because if the malware can set itself as an extension it can also propagate across all of your logged in Chrome installs on all devices. This was a big deal not long ago when an ad vendor starting buying long trusted extensions and injecting ads into them. Suddenly people were getting ads allover, removing the extension command didn't propagate, so you removed it on desktop then you'd use your phone and it would reinfect the desktop because you still had it installed on your phone, just a repeating loop. I believe they fixed the delete propagation but installing will still spread across devices.
Post by: maybejari on Sun, 12 December 2021, 15:24:04
Post by: germpy on Sat, 18 December 2021, 11:19:06
Post by: noisyturtle on Sun, 19 December 2021, 02:14:31
Post by: Leslieann on Sun, 19 December 2021, 09:51:22
you cannot remove or replace Defender.If you use an alternate (such as Avast) it disables/replaces Defender.
It won't completely disable it, it still gets updates but for the most part it's non-functional, it's certainly not scanning anything.
It's frustrating when the software I dropped (Avast) because it was disobedient (scanning files even when "disabled") is actually more obedient than Defender, but that's the current state of Windows.
BTW,
If you think Win10 nannies you just wait for Win11, it's much worse and I'm willing to bet Win12 will be worse still.
Post by: vkeycaps on Sat, 12 February 2022, 05:13:48
Well since switching to Linux I have been using ClamAV to scan some directories every month or so.Is this even a common occurrence to find virus on Linux?
So far no problems. :)
Post by: Leslieann on Sat, 12 February 2022, 10:05:27
Extremely rare to non-existent due to how Linux handles vulnerabilities, so long as you don't give something root/admin and keep up to date, odds of an antivirus ever doing anything for YOU is extremely rare.Well since switching to Linux I have been using ClamAV to scan some directories every month or so.Is this even a common occurrence to find virus on Linux?
So far no problems. :)
The biggest reason for running an antivirus on Linux is if you run W.I.N.E. and/or to protect other systems (Windows) on your network, it may be idle and you may be immune but all it takes is some Windows user to see it and get a bit curious and now you have a virus running through your Windows machines (or W.I.N.E.).
Post by: vkeycaps on Sat, 12 February 2022, 22:39:12
Post by: dankthropod on Wed, 16 February 2022, 02:02:39
Post by: Tastenplatte on Fri, 25 February 2022, 05:06:03
Linux is my antivirus
Do you still use windows for stuff?
Post by: Leslieann on Fri, 25 February 2022, 09:14:15
That's where it gets tricky and it varies greatly but getting better every day.Linux is my antivirus
Do you still use windows for stuff?
Very few with anti-cheat work on W.I.N.E. but most others can (Valve is making progress here).
Sometimes it's easier than Windows to install and backup games and sometimes the performance, especially older games, can be better than in Windows, other times it is an absolute nightmare to get working, might run slower and whether it works at all can depend on multiple variables; what version of W.I.N.E., what GPU driver is in your repo, and even more sketch, what compositor you're running. Wayland is still not well supported by W.I.N.E. and even when it works a simple update can break it.
Some Steam games are quite easy, like the Borderlands series, I think it's like one minor change to the start command to get running, takes all of 30 seconds once you know what to do and it runs great after that. Some games are even native, like Left 4 Dead which runs great (of course).
I have one old Windows game (Command and Conquer series) that while it took a bit to get it working, now runs better and more stable than Windows and I've been using the same install for years on multiple installs by just backing up and copying over a single folder (no re-install needed), try that with Windows. GTA San Andreas is similar. The same happens with my my graphics editor (I haaaaaaate GIMP) and 3d rendering program, it's a simple copy paste to put them on any Linux system.
Compare that to Fallout New Vegas and 4, while I have gotten them to work, the first time was tough, second was easy (I took notes) and the third time I gave up after a few hours. The exact same install method that worked before no longer does and this is not uncommon. Performance was almost on par with Windows the first time but not quite there the second. GTA 5 and GTA online, Bioshock 1 & 2 were all minimal hassle and ran just fine, not sure how they compared to Windows but ran fine however Bioshock Infinite was a non starter.
I attribute most of these issues with my use of Wayland and since I have a spare drive, sometimes it's just easier to drop into Windows. If it's a new (to me) game, I try and get it to run in Linux as I'm probably going to be playing for a while and it's worth doing it to not dual boot all the time. If it's an older game I've beaten and just have an urge to play I will usually give it a shot but I won't spend hours on it because sometimes I only have a few hours to play in the first place so I just drop to Windows.
Post by: Versaknight on Tue, 12 April 2022, 09:16:20
Post by: cherriehirzel on Thu, 14 April 2022, 03:08:58
Post by: jacobalbertus1 on Tue, 19 April 2022, 13:42:59
Post by: granola bar enthusiast on Wed, 20 April 2022, 12:33:33
Post by: mohawk1367 on Fri, 30 September 2022, 08:14:30
Post by: ArchDill on Fri, 30 September 2022, 10:24:14
Post by: Leslieann on Fri, 30 September 2022, 12:03:21
When I got my first windows computer, a friend gave me the best advice... just don't click on links that you don't know what they are. I have lived by that rule and have never had a virus.That you know of.
The advice you got was true way back when, for viruses, it's not true today and hasn't been for a looong time due to other forms of malware which is far more common.
Today's bare minimum is to stay away from shady sites, use Defender, do a scan with something like Malware Bytes on occasion and run an ad blocker, Ublock preferred. Better still, get rid of Chrome and not use Edge, preferably while also using a tool to knock out Windows telemetry.
I would recommend you read through the rest of this thread.