Free vs Paid Anti-Virus

[CroFlames]

According to this: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2388652,00.asp

There are some pretty good free anti-virus softwares out there. I'd say by this chart, AVG and Avast are the best free ones.

Then come the paid anti-viruses: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2372364,00.asp

These all basically got the same ratings.

The question is, is paid really worth it vs a free anti virus? I've been using McAfee but my sub is up and I don't know if I want to pay for another year (and another after that, etc). They are offering me a renewal for $39.99.

What do ya'll use?

[Mass_nerder]

I've been using Avast for the past few years without any problems.

[Huntingwhale]

I use ESET NOD 32. Paid for a copy. Then when it expires, I just google a new username/password. Excellent antivirus, and I won't use anything else.

[Finger Cookin]

I don't use anything since MS stopped updating Microsoft Security Essentials. Which is now Windows Defender, I guess? Oh, and Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit for Chrome.

[Vulcan]

I use the free Bitdefender. It's ranked highly and hasn't screwed around with my other programs like Avast and AVG have done. I also back it up with the free Malwarebytes and Superantispyware as no anti-virus catches everything.

Oh yeah I've tried McAfee as it comes free with Shaw. Another big mistake.

[CroFlames]

McAfee came with my rig 1 year for free. It's a huge program, it kinda takes over your machine. I think less is more in this instance.

I think I'll do a little more research on Avast vs AVG, then augment it with Malwarebytes and Superantipsyware. I wasn't aware of these supplemental programs before.

Cool beans.

[Rathji]

Don't use free AVG, it sells your data. The paid stuff is fine though

[psicodude]

Anti-virus is a waste of time, money, and resources. It has been proven time and time again. At best, it will catch 1+ year old viruses, which isn't going to help anything. All of the new malware, like ransomware, just march straight through AV software.

http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...xpert-symantec

The best defence is to stop downloading free crap as it is typically loaded with malware. That, and don't accept attachments via email. Ever.

[Igster]

Don't pay for AV. Panda is one of the best and has a free version. Use it on all my systems and like the last poster said, just stop downloading stupid things and clicking on things you shouldn't. That's the best protection of all.

[Dion]

I use Norton Security.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by psicodude

Anti-virus is a waste of time, money, and resources. It has been proven time and time again. At best, it will catch 1+ year old viruses, which isn't going to help anything. All of the new malware, like ransomware, just march straight through AV software.

http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...xpert-symantec

The best defence is to stop downloading free crap as it is typically loaded with malware. That, and don't accept attachments via email. Ever.

Originally Posted by Igster

Don't pay for AV. Panda is one of the best and has a free version. Use it on all my systems and like the last poster said, just stop downloading stupid things and clicking on things you shouldn't. That's the best protection of all.

As soon as you add ANYONE else but you into the equation, that is pretty much impossible to do.

I do agree that paying for AV isn't required, but I strongly recommend Malware Bytes Premium as a one time purchase for any home user.

[Igster]

Originally Posted by Dion

I use Norton Security.

Ugh. Really?

Some AV's are so heavy and basically take over your system, create toolbars, have extra stuff added to your browsers for surfing, etc. I just don't get why people pay for that.

Like I said, completely free Panda. In AV testing it has performed much, much better at protecting than any paid AV and is light on the system.

Bitdefender is also very good, but the free version is not supported much and not updated much.

[Igster]

Originally Posted by Rathji

As soon as you add ANYONE else but you into the equation, that is pretty much impossible to do.

I do agree that paying for AV isn't required, but I strongly recommend Malware Bytes Premium as a one time purchase for any home user.

But really, I've seen guys who are on their computers a lot and they see this blinking message that says they have new messages on some web site they are visiting and they click it. Why would you have new messages on a web site you've never been too before? You can't clearly see it's an ad? I don't know...I just see people click crazy without even thinking. Stop and think for a second before clicking something.

And yes, Malwarebytes is an excellent product. I do have a premium copy but find it a bit heavy on the system for realtime protection. It is excellent for scanning every once in a while and the free version is all you need for that.

[psicodude]

Malwarebytes is great as as a detect and destroy product and something I recommend to anyone. It sucks just as much as anything else at actually blocking malware though. That's the entire issue with this software; it creates a false sense of security because it rarely protects you from anything. It's a cat and mouse game with the AV companies being days or weeks behind the malware coders.

[To Be Quite Honest]

I use W10 security softwar! I did use comodo and it was the bomb, but you have a little learning curve with it. It was paid, but the free wasn't bad.

[rbochan]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

I've been using Avast for the past few years without any problems.

Until recently, I'd been using Avast and recommending it to clients for years now, but that's changed. It's gotten so damn annoying with extra resource hogging "features", pop-ups, stealth 3rd party installs, and ads all the time that it wasn't worth the hassle.

I've since switched to Panda. It works well.

As far as paid-for AV, the only one I'd recommend is Kaspersky, but it's still a huge resource hog.

[DoubleF]

Adblock plus is probably more effective for typical users than an antivirus. I have used many different antivirus and I still like Avast for free. Paid, I like Nod32.

McAfee and Kapersky are worse than an actual computer virus IMO.

Norton used to be in that same range, but their newer stuff and gamer version isn't as bad as I believe it's based on their good corporate grade program which was light weight and effective. I still wouldn't pay for it though.

Panda, Avira, Sophos, Bitdefender, PCillin, Kingsoft etc are ok. Average I would say.

Malwarebytes I use the trial on occasion to see if there is anything that Avast (or Panda or Avira etc.) hasn't caught. I use the Nod32 trial to do the same as well.

If Avast gets too bloated, I think I'd use Panda or Avira free versions.

[wooohooo]

If you're with shaw they have free McAfee that comes with your subscription. That said I don't run anything. Just don't download anything stupid but if I do I have back ups

[Hack&Lube]

Used Avast for years. Got tired of the bloat and pop ups. Started trying Avira for awhile on new builds.

Ad block helps on Chrome. McAfee is now owned by Intel so hopefully it will be improved but I think they are trying to target enterprise and not home users for the competent products.

Here in the office, anything that Trend Micro doesn't catch, they manually scan with Malwarebytes.

The real secret to security is to ensure all your products are patched to the nines. That includes all Windows patches, Adobe Reader, Flash, Shockwave, Java, etc. Most exploits you come across on the web will be trying to exploit a vulnerability in one of these libraries.

[CroFlames]

Thanks for the info. This is good stuff.

I always used to just run one anti-virus, but now I've augmented it with malware and spyware catchers too.

Interestingly enough, when I ran Malwarebytes and Superantispyware, it caught a bunch of things the $60 McAfee missed. So even the fancy paid anti-virus should be augmented with malware and spyware apps.