Basic Antivirus and Firewall?

[MariosX]

Hello.

I would like to install a basic antivirus and a basic firewall which will do the following only:

• Find viruses and threats only on scan and let me decide whether I clean them or not
• Get asked by the firewall which programs try to connect to the internet and whether I would like to allow them or not

Until now I was using ESET Smart Security but I got frustrated because even if I have it completely disabled, it still cleans the "threats".

That threat was a Borderlands 2 1.8 Cheater/Trainer and was getting identified like a virus.

 

 

Is Malware Bytes and Comodo Firewall a good choice/combo?

 

[goretsky Supervisor]

Hello,

 

Are you certain the cheater wasn't malware?  It looks like you've got detection of PUAs turned off in ESET Smart Security, so it may have been something particularly malicious you were trying to run.

 

Regards,

 

Aryeh Goretsky

[T3X4S]

to add to gorestky's post - you might see if you can find an MD5 hash of the cheater (many times people who upload those types of things will do so for this very purpose) - then run the MD5 utiility on your program to see if it matches.  Sometimes you can just google the MD5 hash your file created and see if it hits the intended program...

But, once you have verified this program - I recommend webroot's SecureAnywhere 2014 - You can go with the plain jane Antivirus, or the Internet Security version - they both have many config settings.  There is also a gamer version of the AV - but I have been using SecureAnywhere for 2 years now on the 30 computers I admin from home - and only 1 person ever was infected and he lived on 4chan .....  IMO it is the best there is, and has the smallest footprint out of all of them (cloud-based)

[T3X4S]

If you decide to research and google something like "best antivirus 2014" - be aware that many of the top results will be bogus review sites actually made by the software companies.  You will see URL like www.best-antivirus-reviews-top10.com, or similar - all bogus.

This one is a perfect example - Have you ever seen a real review where McAfee wasnt @ the bottom ?

 

[Hum]

The built-in Windows 7/8 firewall works well.

[John.D]

I wouldnt install Mcafee on anything. Nothing wrong with windows AV and firewall. I cant be bothered installing anything else.Most of them will crap out anyway, or crash windows

 

Just dont go to dodgy sites, if you use torrents, be careful what you download / run. And be careful of programs, that install 3rd party programs. And avoid filehippo, Cnet, and download.com. All 3 have downloads that'll install malware

[DarkyDan]

Windows 8 comes with Windows Defender.  The paid applications may be 10% better.. but they are expensive and bloaty.

[Ian W]

This may not be the response you were looking for, but why not stay with Windows Defender and/or Windows Firewall? Both seem to offer what you are looking for in a third-party product, and meet the needs of many Windows users.

If you are insistant on a different antivirus product, you could try Avast or Avira. Alternative firewalls include Comodo and ZoneAlarm.

[T3X4S]

I wouldnt install Mcafee on anything. Nothing wrong with windows AV and firewall. I cant be bothered installing anything else.Most of them will crap out anyway, or crash windows

 

Just dont go to dodgy sites, if you use torrents, be careful what you download / run. And be careful of programs, that install 3rd party programs. And avoid filehippo, Cnet, and download.com. All 3 have downloads that'll install malware

 

Windows 8 comes with Windows Defender.  The paid applications may be 10% better.. but they are expensive and bloaty.

Uhhh...  Guys, before you post you might want to check and see if your "problems" are problems to anyone else, or just you

I use filehippo all the time to get the latest versions of things.  Not once have I ever rec'd anything closely resembling PUA.

As far as "Most of them will crap out anyway, or crash windows"  -- what program are you talking about & how do you know it was the program that caused it ?

Only reason I am diverting the topic a little is because both of these posts make comments that might have been true many years ago, or if they are accurate - the type of AV used should be mentioned so others can avoid/test  -

download.com & cnet - yes they have their own installer - not filehippo or at least any of the progs I ever installed.  Can you provide some of the supposed files that filehippo has changed to throw in malware ?

Paid applications are only 10% better than than Windows Defender ???    - can you elaborate ? 

On the other hand - I agree 100% on never installing McAfee - good thing intel canned it.

[simonlang]

This may not be the response you were looking for, but why not stay with Windows Defender and/or Windows Firewall? Both seem to offer what you are looking for in a third-party product, and meet the needs of many Windows users.

If you are insistant on a different antivirus product, you could try Avast or Avira. Alternative firewalls include Comodo and ZoneAlarm.

 

even if i was a windows user i would keep widely away of any windows defender product. i don't know about their firewall, but about windows defender microsoft said that it's potentially unsecure and users should look for something else.

 

all in all i would rather rise the question if it wasn''t possible for the user to switch to an os where viruses and other security risks are much much lower, for example a modern linux distribution or apples latest mac os.

[T3X4S]

I'll go ahead and play

 

even if i was a windows user i would keep widely away of any windows defender product. i don't know about their firewall, but about windows defender microsoft said that it's potentially unsecure and users should look for something else.

 

all in all i would rather rise the question if it wasn''t possible for the user to switch to an os where viruses and other security risks are much much lower, for example a modern linux distribution or apples latest mac os.

I think it was Microsoft's Security Essentials where they said should be a baseline for the minimum effectiveness and not to be compared to 3rd party... at least thats what I remember but its late and I need food.

Macstar - dont pull the typical "use a mac" an apple user says when someone asks for an AV product - nowhere did the OP mention he was insterested in something else - its not helpful to the thread & besides hes a gamer - pretty much rules out a mac

[Ian W]

I'll go ahead and play

 

I think it was Microsoft's Security Essentials where they said should be a baseline for the minimum effectiveness and not to be compared to 3rd party... at least thats what I remember but its late and I need food.

Yes, yes.

https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-security-essentials-provides-baseline-protection

The only reason I recommended it is because it is better than nothing . . . Other products are obviously better, such as Avira.

[John.D]

I use filehippo all the time to get the latest versions of things.  Not once have I ever rec'd anything closely resembling PUA.

 

You'll get adware if you use their download manager.. Likewise with the Cnet site

 

So, dont say you werent warned if you decide to use their download manager It's only been say in the last few weeks / maybe a mth, that filehippo have added this

 

 

 

 

 

[simonlang]

Macstar - dont pull the typical "use a mac" an apple user says when someone asks for an AV product - nowhere did the OP mention he was insterested in something else - its not helpful to the OP

 

well but it seems legit to assume that he maybe didn't even know about these two OS (together about 2,5% of market share) and their advantages...

[T3X4S]

Oh damn, didnt know filehippo started doing that crap --  a shame,

well - lets hope ninite continues to expand their library

I installed their update checker a couple of times to see if I needed to update anything and it was clean -

I see no mention of a download manager though

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

Eset knows what it's talking about. Trainers/Cheaters can be considered malware because of the way that they alter memory addresses. There should be an exclusion list somewhere, but I'm too tired to look. I'm using Eset, and under advanced setup, I clearly see an exclusion list. Try adding your trainer/cheater to that list, is what I'd suggest. Oh wait, you're using the base line of eset. My bad. I have pro, which lets me see exactly what does what, as you can see: http://imgur.com/nLHt4cc

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

Oh damn, didnt know filehippo started doing that crap --  a shame,

well - lets hope ninite continues to expand their library

dude, they been doing that for quite a while now. I used to use that site to download quite often, but then they did what they did, and I haven't looked at that crap site since. F some hippo! it's the new cnet all over again, tbo. Nobody deserves that. And if you download from there, without warning, you get what you deserve IMO. I avoid it like the plague.

[T3X4S]

dude, they been doing that for quite a while now. I used to use that site to download quite often, but then they did what they did, and I haven't looked at that crap site since. F some hippo! it's the new cnet all over again, tbo. Nobody deserves that. And if you download from there, without warning, you get what you deserve IMO. I avoid it like the plague.

damn -- well it has been a couple of weeks since I have downloaded anything from there - but I wonder if the reason I havent seen it is because I only download a couple files (usually the same thing) like flash update, java update, and VLC & MBAM -

 

[John.D]

Better to get whatever update from the developers site now. Filehippo used to be safe but it isnt now.

 

You can update mbam from within mbam. And if flash's update task is in tasks (altho I've disabled it on this since it can slow things down), it'll tell you or update it automatically. Likewise for Java. Altho I dont use Java on any of these. I dont need it for anything. And there are no programs on these that require it

 

If you want to update flash the full install is here, down the bottom...

[T3X4S]

Better to get whatever update from the developers site now. Filehippo used to be safe but it isnt now.

 

You can update mbam from within mbam. And if flash's update task is in tasks (altho I've disabled it on this since it can slow things down), it'll tell you or update it automatically. Likewise for Java. Altho I dont use Java on any of these. I dont need it for anything. And there are no programs on these that require it

 

If you want to update flash the full install is here, down the bottom...

I disable any autoupdating - I do things manually.  And the idea of going to a site like filehippo is the benefit of a 1 stop shop.

What are you referring to when you say "these" ?

[John.D]

These - The computers here. 3 desktops, and a netbook. None of them have Java on them. It's too buggy / full of holes, and there are no programs that I've installed, that need it.

 

Well if you want to go to filehippo go for it. It's your computer not mine / ours

[eddman]

Until now I was using ESET Smart Security but I got frustrated because even if I have it completely disabled, it still cleans the "threats".

That threat was a Borderlands 2 1.8 Cheater/Trainer and was getting identified like a virus.

That's odd. I use ESET smart security and don't have such issues.

 

Try adding the file to the exclusion list in ESET. That should do the trick.

[Seahorsepip Veteran]

Never ever had eset call any of my files a virus even if they were hacks, cheats, memory injectors, root kits etc etc etc. When you install eset you get a option to choose between detection of "potentionally unwanted software" or not, I chose not. I think eset sees your cheat as "potentionally unwanted software", try reinstalling eset and choose not to detect "potentionally unwanted software" instead.

 

Going for a different anti virus is not going to solve this, as example norton is even worse, it sees even legit software as a virus and blocks it totally sometimes.

 

Personally eset has the least false flags I've seen yet compared to other AV.

[goretsky Supervisor]

Hello,

 

Actually, sites like this are usually made by people or companies who sign up for the antimalware vendors' affiliate marketing programs.  Whomever pays this highest commission is the "best" product.

 

Regards,

 

Aryeh Goretsky

 

 

If you decide to research and google something like "best antivirus 2014" - be aware that many of the top results will be bogus review sites actually made by the software companies.  You will see URL like www.best-antivirus-reviews-top10.com, or similar - all bogus.

This one is a perfect example - Have you ever seen a real review where McAfee wasnt @ the bottom ?

 

Capture.JPG

[goretsky Supervisor]

Hello,
 
T3X4S brings up an excellent point about the hash.  You should try uploading the file (or just submitting its hash value) to a few multiple-engine scanning services like VirusTotal, Jotti VirScan and MetaScan, and see what they report about it.

 

Regards,

 

Aryeh Goretsky

 

to add to gorestky's post - you might see if you can find an MD5 hash of the cheater (many times people who upload those types of things will do so for this very purpose) - then run the MD5 utiility on your program to see if it matches.  Sometimes you can just google the MD5 hash your file created and see if it hits the intended program...

But, once you have verified this program - I recommend webroot's SecureAnywhere 2014 - You can go with the plain jane Antivirus, or the Internet Security version - they both have many config settings.  There is also a gamer version of the AV - but I have been using SecureAnywhere for 2 years now on the 30 computers I admin from home - and only 1 person ever was infected and he lived on 4chan .....  IMO it is the best there is, and has the smallest footprint out of all of them (cloud-based)