No I don’t think so. I know that it is not because of this particular mistake only.
I did express my opinion in other threads already why I am not using CAV and most… most likely never will.
I even wrote one or few times that the development of this AV was not necessary at all…
So, you did not get the point.
What I said now was - there were not so many comments about changing the AV because of mistake(s) by Comodo and the one like this in particular …
and the quick withdrawal was much better move than many mistakes by other securities that were done in the past and will be for sure made in the future
Please read my post carefully in order to get the essence
You have a wrong feeling… as you see, I am using AVG (for ages), and I am using a-squared on different computers… and as you see, I am using Mamutu as a Behavioral Blocker and I used Avast … and I used Avira in the past (did you read the above?)…
and I am using Avira on windows 7 x64 currently … did you read the above?
And for many weeks there was Trend Micro pre-installed on that new win 7 computer - and it was simply impossible to use it, because the “ordinary” (I really don’t like the term…but ) user cannot possibly comprehend its messages …and other stuff
So… well… enough said…
don’t be offended, but you quickly jumped into incorrect conclusions regarding my post
It is really strange that you use other AVs and will (most likely) never use CAV yourself, but at the same time, you think a switching from CAV is not a justified move? ??? ??? (Sure, I have not read your other threads)
By the way, MSC do have notification only option and recent reviews show it have much improved detection rate. I do also use Avira, yes, it got occasional update failure(s), but, so do CAV. That why I think you do not have much experience with the AVs.
Thanks’ for reply.
That is not strange. My point was that really doesn’t matter a lot what AV belonging to the “top 4-5” one is using.
None of them will ever protect you 100%
All of them will have FPs
All of them can (will) miss “zero-thing”
few % or 0.3% difference in those tests doesn’t matter too since that is constantly changing within one hour… and so on
The point was the decision by itself due to this particular incident, whether it is CAV or Avira … after hearing so many users being so excited by this and that AV.
Having AV is very helpful, but it is not a solution for winning this war anyway.
MSE you, mean…
As for my experience you really don’t know and you never will, so basically it’s better to refrain yourself from conclusions like this … that will be at least more polite…
I did not express any doubts about your knowledge … have I?
Strange? Not really, according to the descriptions that I read regarding “high risk” flaggings
Here is the one I found recently and the answer by MS MVP : http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/msescan/thread/c0be40d0-58cb-4e34-85cf-6eb113db5da6
After reading that I installed Avira for my friend, despite I was going to check MSE, since the guy is not really computer literate, and lost the system in the past with MacAfee “auto-quarantine”. So, I was thinking that MSE would be attractive / “easy to use one” as declared.
If you have other info and sources, please tell -that will be helpful and even encouraging.
I will definitely set it up for testing on win 7 if the notification only is available
An AV with acceptable detection rate is already OK for me. I would consider other factors, such as functionalities, performances, FP rates, and resouces requirements too. That why I state with CAV for quite a period before considering another AV. It is not a easy decision and MSE is still on trial.
I’m playing with MSE using eicar test file in order to verify its notification behaviour. Its behaviour is a bit tricky.
It seems that MSC don’t scan zip file such that I can download it on my desktop.
It notified me with the highest security waring when I unzip the file
It allowed me to choose either “quarantine”, “delete” or “allow”
I chose “allow” but no file was created on my desktop. Neither is any file been quarantined nor deleted.
Instead, an exception rule is created that allows creation of the eicar file.
I can then unzip the test file in my second attempt.
P.S. I think people may be mislead by the confiiguration settings as there is no “allow” item provided as default action in configuration table for high risk security warning.
The criticisms of MSE are off base. It’s detection rate is superlative and it practically never has a false positive. It does the best job of removing infections of any of the AV products, paid or free, and the “problem” with automatically removing high risk items can be avoided by simply telling it to quarantine the file instead of removing it. A quarantined file can always be restored if it is later found to be a false detection. The quarantine feature actually works unlike CAV where it very often fails and the only option you’re left with is removal. MSE is an excellent product. It is installed on the Vista machine here and works like a charm.
What was stated about the other products, Avira, Avast, etc. was right on the money.
As far as me changing the Firewall from Comodo goes, I wanted to see if the PC Tools Firewall played nicer with games and other things that I have installed than Comodo does. I found that it does not and I also had an uneasy feeling about my security without CIS so I came back to it.
Firstly, that was not necessarily a criticism, but rather observation and current opinion.
I do not criticize things until I know them closer & better.
It is way too early to judge it like that (“rate is superlative”)… Sorry… not what I heard of and know.
Well - quarantining Is a physical removal of files and/or Registry Entries from their based locations too.
Despite the idea of such removing being “temporary” with the intention and ideal ability of being restored later - the procedure could be as dangerous as deleting (which again,… is the same thing happening). In many cases the system cannot survive and recover from such intrusion when the file is a vital system file. It may not be restored internal system’s technique.
Even if the system file was indeed compromised by the infection and the detection was correct - the removal of the infection and the methods of substituting system files is not trivial and basically cannot be done by ordinary AVs. The spacial methods and malware removal Tools are required.
Needless to say that if the system files like kernell… and alike are infected that never comes alone usually there will be more … rootkit(s) are “common guests” in such situations…
hmmm It seems like we were drifted !ot! from “577” update… but how can we not 88)
Yes, you are absolutely right and I mentioned that
As you can see my point was that the “577 update” incident & withdrawal should not be the main reason for changing the security…
but sure, since other vendors were mentioned with their faults & failures that is very hard not to discuss that in the context… :THNK
Happy days, feeling good most of the time… I’ll be nice:
Have a nice new year, my friend! (I’vd received that too!)
edit: Hey, Grizzly: you know that… just a question: do you have “Tales From Topographic Ocean” by Yes? I’m looking for a full flac of it for a looong time… we could make some share…
This was a screen name you used in the days of yore,on the Avira Forums. (I did say off topic!!)
@AeoniAn :
Sage advice,already internalized and followed. with the wealth of info,and “urban dictionary”,with its cryptic,
semi-pornographic reply,and I was more confused than before.
Anyway,sarcasm is always appreciated.
It makes me feel less guilt at speaking my own mind.
