Battle of the anti-virus: What is the best software?

net-security.org ^

[Gomez]

AV-Comparative.org recently released the results of a malware removal tests with which they evaluated 16 anti-virus software solutions:

• Avast Professional Edition 4.8
• AVG Anti-Virus 8.5
• AVIRA AntiVir Premium 9.0
• BitDefender Anti-Virus 2010
• eScan Anti-Virus 10.0
• ESET NOD32 Antivirus 4.0
• F-Secure AntiVirus 2010
• G DATA AntiVirus 2010
• Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2010
• Kingsoft AntiVirus 9
• McAfee VirusScan Plus 2009
• Microsoft Security Essentials 1.0
• Norman Antivirus & Anti-Spyware 7.10
• Sophos Anti-Virus 7.6
• Symantec Norton Anti-Virus 2010
• Trustport Antivirus 2009.

The test focused only on the malware removal/cleaning capabilities, therefore all used samples were samples that the tested antivirus products were able to detect. The main question was if the products are able to successfully remove malware

from an already infected/compromised system. The test report was aimed to typical home users. A further question was if the products are able to remove what they are able to detect.

Based on a scoring system that evaluated malware and leftovers removal capabilities, these were the results:

"None of the products performed “very good” in malware removal or removal of leftovers, based on those 10 samples. eScan, Symantec and Microsoft (MSE) were the only products to be good in removal of malware AND removal of leftovers", says the report. "Some products do not remove all registry entries on purpose (as long as they do not have any visible side effect for the user), e.g. if that helps to prevent reinfection by the same malware. Furthermore, in some cases it is not possible to know if the registry values (or the hosts file) were modified by the malware or by the user itself (or third-party utilities used by the user)."

To see which malware sample were use and why, and how the particular anti-virus solutions behaved, go here.

[perfect_rovian_storm]

What is the best software?

Linux.

[Gomez]

ping

[klimeckg]

OS X Snow Leopard

[ShadowAce]

[perfect_rovian_storm]

Either will do. I prefer building my own computers though and a hackintosh is too picky with what hardware it’s supposed to work on.

[Gomez]

It’s a test of malware removal.

cfdisk

[discostu]

This must have been paid for by Symantec since the article completely avoided where Norton really loses: resources used, stability, and ability to uninstall cleanly.

[Vendome]

There is no such thing as the
“best” antivirus software.

You have to use a combination of tools such as Admin rights, firewalls(router/computer) and a couple of prophylactic tools such as Spybot, F-Prot and malware programs.

[steve-b]

I had to reformat and reinstall everything to clean up the mess Norton 2004 made.

[freedumb2003]

I suggest:

format c: /u

(actually, I think that doesn’t work anymore...)

[Bidimus1]

Or even more ‘old school

Debug -g=c800:5

[Bidimus1]

Or even more ‘old school

Debug -g=c800:5

[Notary Sojac]

Thought that "Norman" was a misprint for "Norton" and was ready to take a potshot at the study until I saw Symantec listed.

We have always used Avira, Spybot, and ZoneAlarm in our WinXP boxes and are totally satisfied with the protection we get.

I tend to recommend separate products set to do separate things (virus scan, spyware scan, and firewall) rather than an all-in-one package - which unfortunately seems to be the way the vendors are going.

[Fresh Wind]

This must have been paid for by Symantec since the article completely avoided where Norton really loses: resources used, stability, and ability to uninstall cleanly.

Not to mention Symantec's absolutely abysmal technical support and customer service.

[papasmurf]

I installed MS Security Essentials on my Win7 box and, so far, it plays nice, with very little resource usage.

So, if it’s as good as, or better than, AVG and NOD32, I guess I’ll keep using it on my Windows machines.

[Skooz]

bfl

[freedumb2003]

Holy Moley!

That is REAL old school! LOL!

[Robert A Cook PE]

This must have been paid for by Symantec since the article completely avoided where Norton really loses: resources used, stability, and ability to uninstall cleanly.

McAfee is a resource hog - when starting worst of all, then it gets better.

[TChris]

I believe Symantec is suffering from what is a widespread and stupid business practice: Lay off (or buy out, etc.) your best (read: most expensive) programmers and save a pile of money!

How many companies have nosedived into the dirt because the CEO didn't understand the business he was in and got rid of the very people who made it all work?

I don't have insider knowledge that this is what happened for sure, but Symantec sure seems to fit that diagnosis. It went from producing superb software to spewing amazingly, enfuriatingly BAD software.