C.I.S. VS Avast

CIS is for users that like to know what resides on their PC. Avast is for a user that thinks he is getting full protection with a signature based AV as first line of “defense”(WRONG). It is a nice malware detecting utility but uses too much resources

Thats a rather bald statement… so what doesn’t popup countless number of popups is considered a noobish tool?
Too much resources? RAM sticks sell next to chocolate and oranges these days if thats really a problem. But from my experience, anything with 512MB of RAM can run avast! perfectly. And to be honest these days i hardly ever find a PC that has less than 1GB of RAM. I really don’t know why ppl still brag about resources. It’s just pointless.
It’s like complaining over the fact that car is actually using gas. Well no, it’s there just for the weight. Lol…
What difference does it make if program is using 4MB of RAM and some other 12MB of RAM? Absolutelly none.

CIS is for users that like to know what resides on their PC. Avast is for a user that thinks he is getting full protection with a signature based AV as first line of “defense”(WRONG). It is a nice malware detecting utility but uses too much resources

ive used avast(very good protection) with 256 mb,900 mhz pc and had no problems at all,and for the first line of defense its good if you know what the file is that defense is askin you about not everyone does.

RejZoR, I always take notice of your posts :wink: it’s good to have neutral and unbiased opinions.
Bottom line is… avast! has better detection than CAVS3. It may or may not change in the future

The reason why I don’t use Avast! is because I’m very confident with the protection defense+ provides and what the future for comodo may hold…

Very true. I have used Avast on many different configs and it runs very well with good protection. I’m currently using CIS and like the AV also. I think CAVS with D+ make it really strong against malware. So I’m stickin with CIS.


Correct me if there have been plans/announcements on this, but I haven’t heard any news about avast introducing a full fledged hueristics. IMO, w/o this in a modern AV like avast, it will slowly fall behind (like most AVs already are). :wink:

I’ve already explained this and “Heuristics” checkbox itself doesn’t solve anything if antivirus is already using heuristic techniques. And before it will fall behind with these completelly they’ll introduce behavioral detection anyway.

I’m an expert user and i never felt ok to rely on D+. 1000+ files pending for verification after installations also don’t make anything easier (and i install lots of stuff daily). Switching to install mode destroys the whole point of D+. It’s a no go now and will be a no go forever imo. Only thing that i believe in are new heuristics based on CIMA that i have yet to see…

“Full-fledged” “heuristics” is a completely redundant concept. Every competent antivirus on the market today uses heuristics in one form or another. Some products have check boxes and radio buttons for you toggle the heuristics on or off and and act as a psychological consoling agent so you feel better about the product, and some don’t, but they use heuristics all the same.

In avast!'s case, it’s heuristics come mainly from generic signatures (Win32:Trojan/Rootkit/Adware/Spyware-gen, VBS:Malware-gen, VBS:Obfuscated-gen) that accounts for almost 50% of the things it detects, in my experience. If you pay attention to AV-Comparatives, you’ll see that avast! scored higher than Norman, F-Secure and McAfee in the last proactive test, and just about as good as Symantec and AVG – products which include a heuristics on/off option just to make users happy.

Having hueristics doesn’t make one AV better than another, What matters is what detects more… (what ever method they use)

+1 to solcroft

And don’t forget [Cryp] tagged malware. I’ve seen quite few brand new samples being detected as such.

Ah yes, I forgot about that.

Last I heard, the viruslab guys were working on improving the Win32:Ups packer detection to combat the wave of AntiVirus 2009 variants. Let’s hope they get it out soon, because even after all that’s been said… avast!'s zero-day detection isn’t all that hot, to say the least.

Thats where they’re combating the other defense line with Network Shield by filtering trojan downloaders and droppers (all incoming connections) and also malicious URL’s. So if they plan on spawning modified versions of same malware, it’s blocked anyway on TCP/IP level. Technically speaking this very simple method usually works better than any heuristics when you know the propagation address.

I’m aware that file detection itself is not all that hot but avast! proved many times in AV-Comparatives that even without “true heuristics”, it can still reach detection level of others or even supersede them.

As far as AV2009 goes, there are at least 3 unblocked domains since last night that I know of. As for Waledac, domain blocking is simply hopeless, given the rate at which they’re abusing fast-flux domains. Changing domains is usually a far easier job than changing the binary.

The Network Shield, however, is currently working relatively well against FakeAlert trojans, since that group doesn’t seem to switch domains all that often.

I would not care that much about detection rate or heuristics. A proactive defense that popups a msg alerting a strange behavior is more than enough to me as an advanced user. Block the alert, treat the file as isolated, do my research and just in case check the active running processes list and terminate and block it!

See, CIS have tools other than just prevention and an AV to keep your PC safe. It is all in the user. You can not rely on a security suite to do all the job for you. Malware these days is way to advanced for a simple AV even with heuristics which is just another sig based module because the AV needs to know which lines of codes are suspicious in order to work.

But in the other hand, a heuristics module do adds protection to a AV. As I said it is another sig based detection module which could detect a thread not listed on the AV sigs.

If I where to ask, I will Use CIS alone with MAM / SAS because even though you OFF the REAL TIME SCANNING on CIS, by using AVAST or AVIRA as Real Time Scanning, Hmmmm… you will only sucks your PC specially the Memory!
I Tested AVIRA / AVAST on a 384-KBPS to 512-KBPS WIRELESS BROADBAND and 384-KBPS to 700+ KBPS DSL CONNECTION, my VIDEO CHAT becomes INTERMITTENT… that’s why I do not use Both Avast and Avira.

:comodorocks: :comodorocks: :comodorocks:
:comodorocks: :comodorocks: :comodorocks:
:comodorocks: :comodorocks: :comodorocks: XAN how r u? (:WAV)

using two antivirus scanners realtime usually causes stability issues… (:KWL)

A word of caution is wise when trying to run two AV program residential. In the past I had Norton and AVG working happily at the same time. AVG doesn’t seem to be a trouble maker when working side by side.

Enter the ( Comodo) dragon. Honestly I’m no tech, or anything close, but when I first got the laptop I have (Please nobody laugh if it sucks) a HP pavilion 5000, about 6 months ago ( yes used) it had AVAST 4.8 home edition, and AVG free edition. Well it was fine, I hadn’t used a computer regularly for a while, but after a couple of months, ( like after and infection or two) it seemed to me like AVAST only Quarantined the viruses that were on my computer, although it did remove some.
Anyway I accepted it, time went by I started to read some of the Forums on the Web about random topics (which I now highly recommend to people when making any or at least most decisions for PC beginners like myself) .
So just the other day I was cleaning my PC, and learning about registry cleaning, and other stuff to make everything run faster/smoother, when I stumbled upon Comodo in a Forum. So I gave it shot, because it was ranked right under Avast anti virus versions I was already familiar with.
Well , the first day I got like 13 trojans,( I think they were already there) but what was cool, was that it detected/prevented them all, and let me REMOVE ALL of them, which I wasn’t used to when I used AVAST 4.8 free edition.
Because of that I’m going to stick with the Comodoanti-virus “package” (w/ Firewall & Defense) a little longer because I like to try new things , and decide if I like them for sure.
I recommend at least trying Comodo just so you can say you did, because it seems there are some disputes between " Believers" in Avast vs.Comodo, which I found entertaining to read.

I too feel Comodo AV will be top notch pretty soon. I’ve tried Avast (does not incluide malware protection), AVG which is good but does not include rootkit detection/removal, does not scan downloads. Comodo AV already does more than most of the other free ones.

Avast DOES HAVE antirootkit AND antispyware included in the main engine. Both engines are certified.

What do you mean by malware protection?