kaspersly vs Eset ?

[PSP.]

Hello

there many options want paid version 

what you recommend 

[Motifator]

ESET all the way, Kaspersky was last OK two decades ago in my book. Nod 32 interface was, last I checked couple years back, a bit wack though. But it's quite lightweight compared to some other solutions. 

Malwarebytes is the reigning king, has been for long for anything to me save for Macintosh.

You still have an option towards that, though. Dr. Web. An old time anti-virus that used to catch a ton of virus back in 2005, not sure how well the database is now today, but it isn't a very expensive AV. At least, when compared to Malwarebytes. It probably doesn't kick the viruses as hard as Malwarebytes, but their program covers Mac + iOS as well. So you're covered in every Apple device with it, more or less, basically. Their full suite was like $20-30 for a year. Not too bad of a deal actually.

But yeah... just get Malwarebytes.

[manikyath]

honestly, windows defender.

 

malwarebytes has gone rather... 'out for your money with bubbly nonsense'. i've felt like quality of the scans went down, and the intrusiveness of their "recommendations" has gone darn close to fearmongering terretory.

 

Kaspersky.. i mean, there's no reason to suspect they're under any sort of control, but they're russian, which is not the best starting point for a security product in the current climate. not gonna go into that deeper, because that's a highly political problem.

 but past the politics.. i've quite enjoyed the way kaspersky works when i used it.. no-nonsense, straight forward UI,  but that's a few years back now, before their origins became a point of question for the western market.

 

i've never used ESET, so i cant give an opinion on that matter.

 

but there's a behind the scenes detail about all of this.. largely the 'database' of threats any somewhat decent antivirus is aware of.. is the same database, no matter which AV you go for. in this regard windows defender is actually a pretty good option, because it's free and very deeply integrated, giving it very early access to block malicious stuff.

only downside to defender is that the UI is dense as heck, and it doesnt deal well with false positives at all.

[Motifator]

Defender's algo WHEN SCANNING is solid, but when it's sleeping, at times, it's way worse than mr. Igor's first attempt of spider dr. Web + cleaner from 1992... yes, it can be that bad towards certain viruses. It's not like these programs exist for nothing. I've been infected once badly, couldn't enter sites, etc. It was for using a trainer to pass levels on a soulslike game. Defender didn't do jack shit. That's when I started using MB and rest was history, never been infected ever since then.

MB now uses arfitificial intelligence as well, has been doing for some time to counter threads. It's got a solid database that keeps ploughing its way down the list of AVs.

Dr. Web is the single only unicorn I've yet to try with my own self, but given Igor's input over the years, I'm actually thinking to pull the doc webber's on a mini PC soon.

[Mark Kaine]

2 hours ago, manikyath said:

malwarebytes has gone rather... 'out for your money with bubbly nonsense'

yeah, i don't get it... their "monetization" scheme seems so bad now...

 

but how do u know scans are worse, just curious? 

 

I wish VirusTotal would make an app, because as awesome it is... you can only upload 750mb, so its usefulness is limited...

 

I'd even pay for that, because i love the ui, the quickness, etc... 

 

 

4 hours ago, PSP. said:

want paid version

are you on Windows? 

[Motifator]

The scans are not worse today, MB uss heuristic and AI and a bunch of other they call expert system algo. He made that statement up out the rear...

MB not only has a massive database, but also catches a lot of fishy stuff rather as false positives.

They have a forum where you can get any form of malware fixing help, and the fellas are all like Steve Jobs typed but actual makers. It's quite a good AV, actually. ı have it on several of my PCs legit.

[StarsMars]

I'd stay away from kaspersky.

 

Sohpos and Bitdefender are pretty good.

Defender (with regular scheduled scans) and malwarebytes is always a decent choice.

[manikyath]

8 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

but how do u know scans are worse, just curious? 

trigger-happy on pretty much anything they feel is slightly out of line, over-inflating the risk of these <essentially false positives> in the results, etc.

 

when i started dealing with malwarebytes, it was safe to assume that nothing it would kick out would do harm, but the last time i had to deal with it, it involved combing trough some 500 false positives...

 

they've gone from 'a good tool to find malicious stuff that isnt necessarily a virus', to a vehicle to advertise it's own premium license by fearmongering about perfectly mundane stuff. it's not that the scans it does are worse, it's that they obfuscate the results behind marketing, essentially rendering the scans useless.

 

and in this entire pile of suck.. quietly windows defender actually became quite good.

 

EDIT: think of malwarebytes as going down the path of ccleaner... it's usefulness decreased, so it's marketing BS increased accordingly.

[Mark Kaine]

3 hours ago, manikyath said:

trigger-happy on pretty much anything they feel is slightly out of line, over-inflating the risk of these <essentially false positives> in the results, etc.

 

when i started dealing with malwarebytes, it was safe to assume that nothing it would kick out would do harm, but the last time i had to deal with it, it involved combing trough some 500 false positives...

 

they've gone from 'a good tool to find malicious stuff that isnt necessarily a virus', to a vehicle to advertise it's own premium license by fearmongering about perfectly mundane stuff. it's not that the scans it does are worse, it's that they obfuscate the results behind marketing, essentially rendering the scans useless.

 

and in this entire pile of suck.. quietly windows defender actually became quite good.

 

EDIT: think of malwarebytes as going down the path of ccleaner... it's usefulness decreased, so it's marketing BS increased accordingly.

i... yeah i agree totally about the marketing aspect... its bs and not a good sign for things to come... maybe... but the scans itself are as good as ever no false positives so far outside of very few things like  "cheatengine" which for all means and purposes isnt even a false positive,  its a PuP by definition and is labeled as such.

 

Just don't use MWB as "AV" for internet/ live scanning stuff, it NEVER was good at that lol... 

[Mark Kaine]

10 hours ago, Motifator said:

The scans are not worse today, MB uss heuristic and AI and a bunch of other they call expert system algo. He made that statement up out the rear...

MB not only has a massive database, but also catches a lot of fishy stuff rather as false positives.

They have a forum where you can get any form of malware fixing help, and the fellas are all like Steve Jobs typed but actual makers. It's quite a good AV, actually. ı have it on several of my PCs legit.

MWB has always been utterly terrible for real time stuff..... absolutely on mcaffee fearmongering levels.... just use windows defender and you good  

[Motifator]

1 hour ago, Mark Kaine said:

MWB has always been utterly terrible for real time stuff..... absolutely on mcaffee fearmongering levels.... just use windows defender and you good  

Yeah cheatengine (uhh, YOU WANT A FREE 4090 FROM CHEATHAPPENS MAILS), gets you the AV shaft. You shouldn't be aroused too much that your anti-virus solution (MB) is popping up about game cheats. They have all the rights towards that shit. As the old saying ago, cheaters can never be winners. The only one you're cheating is your own self for paying that machine learning game cheat shit.

Defender to this day sucks about real time. Enter any porn site to see how effective it is, or gambling, casino, blackjack. I'm saying this just for you, you know. To understand how much it sucks real time. The only things Defender rocks real-time is, when YOU, ON PURPOSE, download a trojan, then it has it scanned right on your PC's SSD... other than that, it sucks so bad it's not even funny when it comes to several fishy websites.

Solutions of more actual protection like MB, Dr. Web etc... are MUCH more strict towards porn and shit.

[Mark Kaine]

16 hours ago, Motifator said:

the only one you're cheating is your own self 

i think you're completely unaware of what ce is... its used for a lot of modding stuff, also stuff like changing the FOV in third person single player games is hardly "cheating"... its called improving the gaming experience 

 

 

16 hours ago, Motifator said:

for paying that machine learning game cheat shit.

yeap, no clue what you're talking about... pay for ce? machine learning? that's not how it works at all... 

 

 

(ce is all about manipulating the data in memory JFYI) 

 

 

16 hours ago, Motifator said:

Solutions of more actual protection like MB, Dr. Web etc... are MUCH more strict towards porn and shit.

again, defender is all you need, no need to pay for an AV that mostly relies on false positives, fearmongering *and* reads your data...

 

i rather ms steal my stuff than random company "xyz"...