My pc is often used to download junk such as free games. Want information that compares the effectiveness of pay for AV’s compared to free AVs. I use a free version but free is usualy shit.
Well i know Avast 4.7 Home Edition is pretty good and also AVG Anti virus is good also.(both are free) But when CAVS is final it will be the one that tops all Free AV’s (also free and in beta at the moment)
Hi FJR 1300
Good place to start is http://www.av-comparatives.org/ .But i think they only evaluate (paid) versions, but in any case will give u an example of what is around, i am a NOD32 user and i am totally satisfied with the product, around £40 for a 2 year license.(thats a typical night down the local) so in that perspective its worth it?
I totally agree with goose with CAVS as it will be awsome when it is final.What you also got to take into consideratoin is that many other companys offer (free) but limited versions of there products, but here at Comodo u get the full monty, so to speak.
So dont take this the wrong way, but maybe not a good idea to say “but free is s**t” as in this case comodo offer superb FULL products to all their users.
Many thanks
novie
Good place to start is http://www.av-comparatives.org/
+1
It really depends on you, people who are very concerned about their computers’ security, such as corporations with sensitive data in them, usually pay for an AV. Many ordinary individuals on the other hand don’t bother (I for example), and an ordinary user can be pretty safe with free security software, even if his Internet habits aren’t kosher, 
specially if he knows ways to increase his security besides blindly relying on an AV.
It’s true what you’ve been said about CAVS, the people developing it really mean it to be eventually as good and much better than any other AV and will include protection against all malware not just viruses, worms and trojans like traditional AVs. If you don’t believe that they intend to give it for free, just check the firewall. Well we’ll see.
Anyway the top three free AVs are, in order of increasing detection rates, AVG Free, Avast, and Avira AntiVir. I use AntiVir and the good thing about it is that I know that the stuff the free version has missing compared to the pay version wouldn’t give me a tad of protection in addition. And AntiVir is a very good AV, I don’t know exactly how it compares to the top notch (such as NOD32 or Kaspersky?), but I know it’s not s**tty in comparison.
Also you can have only one AV with resident protection installed but you can have as many as you want installed to perform scans as soon as only one of them at the most has resident protection enabled. So if you want to be really sure about something you’ve downloaded you can scan it multiple times with different AVs. Or you can upload it to VirusTotal and they’ll scan it with every major AV, that’s as sure as you can be about a file.
woooo, easy guys, why should we pay for what we can get for free???
i’ve been using CAVS, CFP,CBOClean,and Superantipyware free edition. all free & no probs at all.
i’ve heard avast & avira (free) are good too.
Ganda
There r always 3 most-discussed choices for free AV: Avira, Avast and AVG. And we also got another good choice is CAVS. Im sure anyone of em is good enuf to protect urself. Whether u like or not is more on personal issue and ur taste .
Yes no one wanna taste sh*t. But I dun think AVG, Avira, Avast free version r so bad like dat.
There r 2 distinct concepts of “free version” and “free”. The 1st one is ~ “carrotware” which u can choose to pay to taste the thing sweeter than carrot. The later serves u the whole dragon like Comodo does:)
… absolutely NOT worth paying for .
Why do people always forget about ClamWin, to my knowledge the
only TRUE free AV-program (Open Source etc etc ) ?
yeah it doesn’t score great in all those tests but then
it doesn’t check for 15 year old virus that only run on 16-bit systems …
do u mean dat only open source is TRUE free? the how abt Comodo? well it dun giv u the source but do u haf to pay anything?
yeah it doesn't score great in all those tests but then it doesn't check for 15 year old virus that only run on 16-bit systems ..Clamwin is more suitable for mail server and Linux user. On recent test, ClamAV catch 100% Linux virus. however, there r reasons ClamWin is not so recommendable (im using clamwin now btw) _no resident shield;actually can integrate w spyware terminator or moon secure AV or winpooch. _slow scan _low detection rate for Windows _continuing to b free is a qn since it was acquired
I’m afraid Gordon is talking more about ideology instead of functionality and I’m not going there, anyway I’m afraid he answered himself:
Well because…
it doesn't score great in all those tests
Actually Ive just regconized dat the word “free” can haf ambiguous meanings (after LM’s xpalnation)
_free to use app: apply to Comodo and other closed-source apps
_free to the whole app: apply to most open-source apps.
its somehow like:
_u r free to drink the coke (of course after u pay)
_but ull never kno the formula of coke
It is worth paying for when it does it’s job. But it is also known that there are unknown dangers out there, and about 30 percent of malware are not being detected by definitions of the best av’s at the moment.
Well, better than nothing, you may say. Yes, in fact. But nothing more. Having Avira free will be enough for an anti virus proggie, but add some reliable antispyware to this (like emsisoft a squared as a free scanner) and Comodo BOClean as a realtime Trojan Shield. Maybe some HIPS like SSM and (at the moment) the only reliable active antispyware shield: SpywareTerminator.
You could also think of memory protection like Comodo’s still Beta version of Memory Guardian (but it works great here)…
You could also think of adding some Immunizers to your SW. Spybot SD or SpywareBlaster perhaps…
And you could have a ■■■■.
Cheers:)
O.K. I have read all the input so far but no one has addressed removing Malware . . .
I recently got hit with win32\matefender when some visiting friends spent the night on my computer and I have tried most everything to get rid of it but NO WAY!
Any suggestions would be helpful . . .
In trouble because it’s my work computer.
napamac
http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/virusinfo/scan.aspx Will detect it and remove it. You need to use Internet Explorer 7 To run the scan though. Hope this helps.
From what I gather this file is a component of the Smitfraud malware.There is a specific removal utility available with instructions from here:
(:LGH)
Actually yes it is, because if you download a lot from the internet, you really need the paid ones. It is a known fact that paid antivirus has always an edge over the free ones.
These are my recommendations
Kaspersky Antivirus Version 7.0.0125
Nod32 Version 3.0.0551.0
Bitdefender Antivirus 2008
Avira Antivir Premium
:BNC
The free version of AntiVir has a detection rate greater than most paid for AV and only marginally lower than the best.Used in conjunction with a secondary,on demand AV Bitdefender(free edition) would give good results.Once Comodo AV is finally completed I have no doubt that the detection rate will be comparable to (and probably exceed) anything
As Morphos says though an AV is only a single component of the layered defence that is required.
(:HUG)
That is correct but I just upgraded to the paid Avira Premium Personal Edition which is even more powerful than the avira free… :BNC
Hi ultragunner:
Quote: Actually yes it is, because if you download a lot from the internet, you really need the paid ones. It is a known fact that paid antivirus has always an edge over the free ones.
Now, if that’s true, a bad AV which is not free, by your definition obviously has to be better than the best non-free? I seriously doubt that, my friend…!
You may ask why?
Ok. Comodo Firewall has already proven that free programs CAN indeed be better than ALL OTHERS for whom you’d have to pay…
And, of course, I say thank you for having purchased the extended version Avira. Because by paying this fee, children suffering from cancer will have better medication (i guess you know that already?).
Cancer is one of the most fiendish plagues of our times.
If you ever had a friend suffering from or having died by cancer you’ll know what I mean.
The supporting company behind avira seeks to fight cancer with this AV.
So I won’t ever say something like “it isn’t rentable”.
All I tried to say is there are people out there who cannot even afford to pay a single piece of software.
You and me can, of course. But there’s people out there, and they’re going by millions I tell you, that can’t even afford to pay Avira “plus”.
Shouldn’t those people without too much money be able to use free software whilst being “totally” (relative expression) secure?
Because this is so, I always try to keep up with having in mind the most secure, whilst free of costs, solution for all.
Hope you know what I mean?
(:LGH)
You may have a point. Online Armor Free & Comodo outclasses all paid firewall, that is correct but whether it is the same case with the antivirus, well for now that remains to be seen. (:WIN)
of course it is the same case with AV, paid ==> Norton
free ==> Avira/Avast!
we know which one is better.
hey, about the cancer donation, is there any bank account number? so we can just transfer the money instead of buying the product?