NOD32 is very good but Symantecs latest AV are quite good to if customized. But yeah the memory footprint and ease of use is definitly better for NOD32.
Good antivirus
- Thread starter mito
- Start date
NOD32 is very good but Symantecs latest AV are quite good to if customized. But yeah the memory footprint and ease of use is definitly better for NOD32.
NAT is hardly enough to be a good firewall.
Does it inspect packets or just reroute them to the NATed IP? Are all incoming ports closed? Are those opened "statefully" inspected?
Seriously, a hardware NAT router is a minimal firewall and provides no intrusion prevention or a host of other things. At the office I use a Safe@Office (CheckPoint VPN-1 based) and at home I use a hardware NAT with Kaspersky.
Does it inspect packets or just reroute them to the NATed IP? Are all incoming ports closed? Are those opened "statefully" inspected?
Seriously, a hardware NAT router is a minimal firewall and provides no intrusion prevention or a host of other things. At the office I use a Safe@Office (CheckPoint VPN-1 based) and at home I use a hardware NAT with Kaspersky.
That would be about the intent of the admins versus the users. At home, you're both.
No, it's not. It's about the unpredictability of who/what will try to access your system without your knowledge or consent.
Seriously, stop this nonsense about NAT routers and Firefox being the be-all end-all of Internet security.
Ike Turner
Veteran
Another vote for NOD32
chavvdarrr
Veteran
Nod32 is crap IMHO
small footprint - yes, but also it tends to get infections through... and once they are in there is no way to clear them ...
Last time I had to
a) clear the virii with CureIt (stand-al0one emergency av cure from drweb which is maybe better than Kaspersky and also russian... but no serialz for it)
b) as the disaster was big - several infections, lots of files ,etc ... reinstalled
Sadly that had happened with Avast HE also
, all this on a home PC I rarely use - mainly my wife and kids
Symantec & Kaspersky use many resources... AVG seems ok (no problems last 2 months). At work we used CA eTrust for 3y without problems... but v.8 had crappy interface so we switched to Symantec Corporate (you know, no one ever gets fired for buying Symantec software....)
We checked Nod also, but lets say their server software was.... CRAP.
small footprint - yes, but also it tends to get infections through... and once they are in there is no way to clear them ...
Last time I had to
a) clear the virii with CureIt (stand-al0one emergency av cure from drweb which is maybe better than Kaspersky and also russian... but no serialz for it)
b) as the disaster was big - several infections, lots of files ,etc ... reinstalled
Sadly that had happened with Avast HE also
, all this on a home PC I rarely use - mainly my wife and kidsSymantec & Kaspersky use many resources... AVG seems ok (no problems last 2 months). At work we used CA eTrust for 3y without problems... but v.8 had crappy interface so we switched to Symantec Corporate (you know, no one ever gets fired for buying Symantec software....)
We checked Nod also, but lets say their server software was.... CRAP.
Nod32 is crap IMHO
small footprint - yes, but also it tends to get infections through... and once they are in there is no way to clear them ...
Last time I had to
a) clear the virii with CureIt (stand-al0one emergency av cure from drweb which is maybe better than Kaspersky and also russian... but no serialz for it)
b) as the disaster was big - several infections, lots of files ,etc ... reinstalled
Sadly that had happened with Avast HE also
Symantec & Kaspersky use many resources... AVG seems ok (no problems last 2 months). At work we used CA eTrust for 3y without problems... but v.8 had crappy interface so we switched to Symantec Corporate (you know, no one ever gets fired for buying Symantec software....)
We checked Nod also, but lets say their server software was.... CRAP.
Interesting, but many if not all AV/FW needs to be customized to give better protection. If one leaves the settings at default then the protection is only moderate.
Im sorry, but I really want to flame you, why? maybe for not being able to use a PC???
Nod32 is crap? Tomorrow I will post a gif, why its the best AV around. I've been using it for 18 months and it has never ever let me down. I've installed it across servers and workstations here and in my mailbox I get alerts from users downloading viruses and opening up mail that contains attachments. Nod32 always gets in there and stops the viruses.
Maybe you shouldnt knock Nod32 and give it another go. Maybe you had installed an old version or exluded c:\*.*
Why is NOD32 the single and very best? According to what specs?Im sorry, but I really want to flame you, why? maybe for not being able to use a PC???
Nod32 is crap? Tomorrow I will post a gif, why its the best AV around. I've been using it for 18 months and it has never ever let me down. I've installed it across servers and workstations here and in my mailbox I get alerts from users downloading viruses and opening up mail that contains attachments. Nod32 always gets in there and stops the viruses.
Maybe you shouldnt knock Nod32 and give it another go. Maybe you had installed an old version or exluded c:\*.*
Like with GPU benchmarks, there are more criteria that determine what is best to whom than simply looking at the 3DMark score. Price being one. The interface being another. And it not flagging programs I wrote myself and definitely aren't viruses is also important to me. Being as less intrusive as possible. And yes, it does have to protect you from the occasional virus you might encounter every once in a while as well.
Should it score best in synthetic benchmarks? Where they make up a large bunch of new viruses and expect the scanner to catch all those? Is that the single most important criterium? And do you rather have a lot of false positives, than the vanishingly small chance of a false negative?
I always get a laugh when someone says that so and so AV is crap because they got an infection.
If you look at the data that's out there EVERY single AV program gets infections. Nobody has zero-day 100% detection. Nobody. In fact, nobody does better than 40% on zero-day.
When a new baddie comes out sometimes Kaspersky gets it first, sometimes MacAffe and sometimes Sophos, etc.
In general everyone can catch it within about three weeks - yes, three weeks. Sometimes it takes SAV three weeks, sometimes it takes Sophos three weeks.
This is just the nature of AV/AS.
If you look at the data that's out there EVERY single AV program gets infections. Nobody has zero-day 100% detection. Nobody. In fact, nobody does better than 40% on zero-day.
When a new baddie comes out sometimes Kaspersky gets it first, sometimes MacAffe and sometimes Sophos, etc.
In general everyone can catch it within about three weeks - yes, three weeks. Sometimes it takes SAV three weeks, sometimes it takes Sophos three weeks.
This is just the nature of AV/AS.
Uh...name me one good AV that doesn't use heuristics please.
Check the stats. There are sites that tell you the day each could catch new virii
Yes, and from looking at http://www.av-comparatives.org/ it seems in the last comparison available (Feb 2007) that NOD32 nailed all 12 polymorphic virii they threw at it. Other AV suites have also faired well too. I was surprised to see Symantec being the only other AV program to catch all 12. Some of them only caught 1 or 2. Would that not indicate that other AVs are not using heuristics, or heuristics of lesser quality?
Were you refering to some report available elsewhere?
Here's another report (Nov 2006) where they test out detection of new items. Some have better detection than others, but as you said, none is 100% foolproof. Some just work better than others.
Were you refering to some report available elsewhere?
Here's another report (Nov 2006) where they test out detection of new items. Some have better detection than others, but as you said, none is 100% foolproof. Some just work better than others.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stop saying "virii." It is dumb.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural_of_virus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural_of_virus
personally, and this is just me, but i've found anti-virus software totally unneeded. Get a good router and use some internet sense. Also helps in a huge way to use a web based email account for signing up to random things or purchases. I havent had one virus in years. Plenty of malware and spyware for sure, i use IE what do you expect, but nothing nearly bad enough that i felt justified the need of paying a subsciption or the running of yet another program in the background.
If someone really wants to destroy your files or installations they will, hence why i use redundancy when its comes to things that matter. I've used a few anti-virus + firewall + spyware programs for substantial periods (AVG, Nortons, BitDefender, McAfee) in the past and found that they largly sat idle not finding a thing, so they got removed. I still have zero regrets.
If someone really wants to destroy your files or installations they will, hence why i use redundancy when its comes to things that matter. I've used a few anti-virus + firewall + spyware programs for substantial periods (AVG, Nortons, BitDefender, McAfee) in the past and found that they largly sat idle not finding a thing, so they got removed. I still have zero regrets.
Last edited by a moderator:
I am using the free version of AVG at home. No problems http://free.grisoft.com/doc/1
chavvdarrr
Veteran
I'm not expecting that it will give 100% protection.Im sorry, but I really want to flame you, why? maybe for not being able to use a PC???
Nod32 is crap? Tomorrow I will post a gif, why its the best AV around. I've been using it for 18 months and it has never ever let me down. I've installed it across servers and workstations here and in my mailbox I get alerts from users downloading viruses and opening up mail that contains attachments. Nod32 always gets in there and stops the viruses.
I expect if a virus came in and then AV program was updated and now is able to find it, that the virus will be cleared and stopped from functioning.
Nod failed. That's crap. That was 2 months ago
CureIt - cured infection.
Avast HE failed same test - 6 months ago
My firm evaluated Symantec, Nod and Avast ~6 months ago, we got 2 week trials.
We have a small domain (200 machines 2 branches), Exchange... usual things.
Deployment tools were not working as expected (read: problems deploying), the test-server went mad loosing domain connectivity ... We lost 2 days trying to make it work, then guys that sell NOD here suggested to us to ask in NOD forums ... obviously we were looking for better support.
Of these 3 Avast had imho the most advanced management interface (well I liked it
), extras and worked fine out-of-the-box.Also Symantec worked fine.
Bought Symantec because its more expensive
so it must be better.MulciberXP
Regular
Ditto to NOD32, thats what I'm using now.
Kaspersky is also great but the UI is not nearly as intuitive as NOD32s
Norton AV blows, it only protects you from a virus or trojan AFTER it infects your machine. It's also a resource hog.
I haven't used Avast since 05', but I stopped using it because it constantly bogged down my system.
Nothing. Or at least that's how I've been running my Windows rig for several months now, in both XP and now Vista. I've actually never had a virus on any of my personal rigs. Risky business? Maybe, but I do not have any media on the computers that is must have or that I want for permanent storage, that is backed up on my server.
Similar threads
