Posting the best Antivirus.
>2016
>using an AV
I use powershell, try me
>>55455604
GNU/Linux
>>55455604
Literally just run microsoft security essentials and don't be an idiot.
>>55455604
>>install Gentoo
>>55455604
Did I timetravel back to 2007?
ITT post your favourite snakeoil
>>55455604
Common Sense 2016 Ultimate Edition
>>55455725
I don't want the botnet looking at my virus's.
bitdefender?
This is one of those topics where most of /g/ doesn't really have a clue. File that under the anons who are still running WinXP because it's "comfy", like complete muppets.
OP is right. KAV's also pretty good. The MS shit is still better than nothing.
Relying just on Common Sense 2016, which you should have as well, has no defense-in-depth and will burn you the first time your browser or other software gets 0dayed, which can happen, or doesn't get updated on time, in which case you weren't really running Common Sense. You are only human.
Windows should also have EMET installed for enhanced exploit mitigation.
Some AVs are worse than nothing, not just from a performance point of view, case in point Symantec: they do parse shit, and sometimes fuck that up on an epic scale. And lots of the malware writers now test against AVs, even selling crypters (I miss the days when you had to be at least that smart to enter), so they will not catch everything: aim to minimise false positives while still having good heuristics and rapidly-deployed signatures, and ESET does well at that.
But a good AV might save your bacon. Don't discount that shit because you think you're better than everyone else, untouchable, because you're wrong, you suddenly became a prime spear-phishing target, and probably have credentials for handy infrastructure that someone would like to steal.
>>55456129
This is the worst snake oil
>>55456303
>burn you the first time your browser or other software gets 0dayed
This. Obviously you can prevent 99,999% of all threats just by using common sense and adblocker, but what if that 0,001% happens one day?
>>55455725
>Uses Microsoft Security Essentials
>Calls other people idiots
>>55456303
you do realize that you aren't gonna get 0dayed nowadays unless you get targeted right?
>>55456303
If you get hit by a 0day you were not running common sense.
Avast, best for when the SHTF
>>55456836
What if someone hacks a popular site and injects a 0day there?
>>55456872
Then he deserves to win.
>>55456836
Nigga get out, you have no clue what a 0day is.
>>55455604
Kaspersky here, bring it on.
>>55456836
Go back to that one website
>>55455604
McAfee, obviously.
>>55455632
>2016
>being stupid enough not to use antivirus
>>55456522
Agreed.
>>55456802
For the average shithead user, it's perfectly fine. Defender is FAR better than it used to be. Yes, a dedicated antivirus program is better, but Defender will stop most things, and most people don't need more than that. Plus, let's be honest, the average user doesn't want to spend money on antivirus software because they think it's irrelevant (whether or not it is, that's another discussion entirely, though having something is always better than nothing).
>>55456788
Nigga. Maybe raise that chance to 15%
>>55456895
I always bring the pain. :^)
Do you people really need an AV when stuff like uBlock Origin and Malwarebytes exist?
>>55456303
How the fuck do AVs protect you from 0days?
>>55456129
I'm sure Russian botnet owners love when people like you spread the idea that using "common sense" is enough to prevent you from getting infected.
>>55456303
Symantec is worse than nothing because of shit like this:
>http://www.zdnet.com/article/symantec-antivirus-product-bugs-as-bad-as-they-get/
>an antivirus program that has remote code execution vulnerabilities built in
top keeeeeeeek, pic related
kaspersky is pretty good tho despite the company's shadiness
Everyone who uses antivirus deserves to die in fire.
>>55457356
t. unwitting bitcoin miner
>>55457356
Everyone who thinks everyone who uses antivirus deserves to die in fire deserves to die in fire.
>>55457356
So sorry for foilingyour plans
>>55457270
>implying you aren't replying to the leader of a botnet ring from Mother Russia
>eset at work so I have someone to bitch at if something goes wrong and because I can't guarantee other employees aren't dipshits
>windows defender and malwarebytes at home because I don't do anything sensitive there just play muh bideogames
If I get fucked it's my own fault
>>55457321
Plus Symantec and McAfee shit all over your OS. It's like a field day for autistic rats.
>>55455604
Found this great antivirus some time ago, it works great
>>55455632
>>55456111
>>55456129
>>55457356
>>55457392
Meme harder, edgelords.
>>55457253
You really only need NoScript/uBlock.
99% of malware infections come from your browser, specifically javascript, even more specifically from malicious ads.
Despite what I say, I still have an AV running in the background for those 1% edge cases. I have the resouces, so I guess it's better to be safe than sorry.
>>55457421
never torrenting also helps
>>55457434
Or, you know, only torrent stuff that is legitimate and don't be a fuckwit when torrenting. It's pretty easy to tell what is and isn't a safe torrent. You should still use an anti-virus program though.
>>55457264
Heuristics.
Also, just because the attack vector from which you were infected was exploited using a 0day doesn't mean the malware that they load onto your computer is unknown
Someone could use a driveby download 0day to infect people with a Zeus variant, for example.
Your "common sense" solution means you wouldn't be aware that you got infected because in your mind, you didn't visit any shady websites, but your antivirus would very likely pick up the Zeus bot.
People often forget this, but if you're on Windows, the best thing you can do is not run your main account as Admin.
By running as admin, you're wide open to privilege escalation. this is how people get fucked hard by malware. once you get it, it basically has full control, where as if you were logged on as a regular user account, it wouldn't be able to make wide system changes.
>>55457211
>Defender is FAR better than it used to be
This is literally the exact opposite of the truth, you dumb little cuck. The current MSE-based version of Defender is worse than it's ever been. When MSE launched it was a good antivirus that competed with paid products. Now it's an absolute piece of shit that comes dead last in every round of independent testing and won't protect you from anything relevant. If anything, it's even worse for the "average user", since they're the ones most likely to be exposed to newer malware that MSE won't catch.
In before a dumb semantic argument about MSE vs Defender, but Defender wasn't even an AV before it became a rebranded MSE, so that'd just confirm you as a retard.
>>55457491
This. Also it's not like the regular user needs admin rights constantly, so it's not really even a bother at all.
>>55457491
Doesn't not being admin fuck with all sorts of programs though? IIRC this is why the UAC prompts introduced in Vista were designed in the first place, to act as a compromise between program functionality and security of not logging in as root.
>>55457491
maybe on winxp
uac solved this
>>55457491
Why not run windows in a vm with linux or windows on top, anything happens to vm just trash it and copy a fresh one
>>55457529
Nah. I run an limited account for everyday usage and encounter UAC prompts practically only when installing something.
>>55457532
what difference does it make if your bitcoin miner is running in a vm or not
you're still mining bitcoins
>>55457549
I don't quite get how UAC works.
If you're on a limited account, how can it confirm you're the actual admin simply by clicking 'yes'? Shouldn't prompt for a password or login, like how linux distros require you to login as root?
>>55457532
A lot of people do this and it works in a lot of cases
BUT
if you have guest additions or some kind of hardware passthrough enabled and you're being targeted, virtual machine escape (see: venom) is a very real thing, although rare.
>>55457581
you run an admin account, but programs do not run with administrator privileges unless you ask them to or allow them when they ask
>>55457512
>you dumb little cuck
You just proved all your arguments invalid, but thanks.
I wasn't going to argue semantics anyway since I know the original Defender wasn't an anti-virus program.
No matter what, Defender is still better than nothing. But, you know, whatever, keep going on being a faggot you attacks people for no good reason.
Have fun with your "best" antivirus, John McAfee.
>>55457392
/Thread
>>55457623
not even John McAfee likes that antivirus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgf5PaBzyg
Avira
/thread
>>55457581
I asks for password if you are using limited account, on admin account its just Y/N.
http://www.av-comparatives.org/
So is this website paid to give good reviews?
>>55457715
>>55457596
>admin account its just Y/N
that's what I'm saying.
couldn't some malware bypass that since it doesnt actually ask for any type of password
>>55457531
Not him but there are tons of UAC bypasses out there, it's being abused by a lot of malware in the wild
Some Ruski even open sourced like 17 bypass methods, look up UACme on github
Also don't trust AV companies, most behavioral detection engines are complete shit and won't even detect your files being encrypted en masse. It also takes them like 20 hours to detect fresh malware binaries, way too fucking long for just creating a new signature
>>55457875
No, unlike X server, unprivileged programs don't have access to the whole screen.
There are exploits >>55457875
, yes, but it isn't necessarily easy, nor common.
I work in this field, and I can tell you that the fashion nowadays is to not use admin access at all. Malware doesn't need it. They copy themselves to the user's local %appdata%, set themselves to startup, and done. Some also mess with your personal web browser profile/install extensions this way as well. It only ever affects your user (if they have admin privileges, usually they add registry keys to enforce a certain ad-ridden search engine or keep an extension from being uninstalled). SOmething like a bitcoin miner doesn't need any special privileges, it just needs access to CPU time and the network, which a regular user has.
I aint paying fucking yearly licenses for software that will come in handy once or twice in like 10 years.
Just set up a fucking backup thats not connected to the PC all the time and thats it.
If it's for bussiness then you should have been given a company computer which should already have some protection.
Fucking autists, free AVs suck dick anyways
>>55457955
>I aint paying fucking yearly licenses for software that will come in handy once or twice in like 10 years.
Getting your identity jacked stays with you for life, m8.
>>55457955
torrent it and scan your system once it's installed you fucking loser.
>>55457941
Lol what are you talking about, UAC bypass is very common in skidware
>>55458025
not really. things get patched really quickly when they happen.
>>55457987
For which you would probably have to be targeted. Which means I have to be somebody competent or rich people care about.
Can safely Im good then.
>>55458009
>get the antivirus from a place thats notorious for spreading malware
Yes I used to do that and no Im not scared of doing it again but looking at it logically it doesn't make sense.
Not to mention cracks are getting worse and worse and constantly having to update the program by installing everything from scratch again is a pain in the ass.
Why bother using an AV if you wont update it
>>55458039
Most malware doing this are obviously aiming for unpatched systems
But like you said, any competent malware authors won't use UAC bypass anymore
>>55458074
the only one I've found that's annoying is malwarebytes premium. every 2 updates the thing puts me back to the trial and I have to find a new key.
megacorps are so fucking annoying though why don't they just fuck off and leave us be
>>55458115
Yea fuck mbam. I cracked the premium version and the database update is bugged, what a piece of shit
>>55458074
>Which means I have to be somebody competent or rich people care about.
So why should anyone care about your opinion on AV software since you're admittedly a fucking loser?
>>55457623
Just because he called you a name doesn't mean he's wrong. He literally followed the insult with a paragraph detailing why you're wrong.
Allow me to further expand his point. When Windows Defender first came out as Microsoft Security Essentials, it WAS really good. That is because Microsoft actively competed for it to be a superior option in the market of free Anti-Viruses. As of today, however; this is no longer the case. That is because years ago, Microsoft made the choice to no longer compete against other anti-virus companies. Instead, they chose to shift MSE to being a 'baseline' for other anti-viruses to be measured.
http://www.howtogeek.com/173291/goodbye-microsoft-security-essentials-microsoft-now-recommends-you-use-a-third-party-antivirus/
From all independent metrics, it appears Microsoft is keeping true to that with Windows Defender. Any detection rate study I've seen puts Windows Defender at mediocre at best. Which is consistent with what Microsoft said years ago. They want it to be the 'baseline', a means for other anti-viruses to be measured. At worst, a 'better-than-nothing' solution for Windows as a whole.
>>55458144
And I take it you're somebody of great importance and the russian skidders would have a great interest in hacking you?
>>55456129
You could have at least posted a reddit frog/pepe with your epic meymey
>>55458133
>>55458115
>I pirated software.
>ITS FUCKING BULLSHIT THAT THIS DOESN'T WORK.
>NO, PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE PAID TO SPEND COUNTLESS HOURS MAINTAINING MALWARE DATABASES.
Holy fuck, are you legitimately this retarded?
>>55455604
>ANTIVIRUS
>E V E R
fuck even when I was a Windows user I wouldn't even get viruses because common sense, now it's essentially impossible since I run GNU and Mac OS.
>>55458528
>tfw the world runs on foss
>tfw made possible using only voluntary donations and voluntary enterprise support money
>the fuck linux kernel, in all its glory, is available completely free
>somehow given all this its is reasonable that I should be expected to pay for some pajeet monkeys to maintain av lists
gas them desu
fuck capitalism
>>55455604
Pic related. I suppose you could use ClamAV if you are really worried (maybe you have an out-of-date edition of Common Sense?)
>>55458591
Don't trip on that edge, retard.
Malware bytes with JRT
Everyone who is stupid enough to use AV should be barred from using computers.
>pirating antivirus
>to protect against malware
>to not become part of a botnet
If I was a writer of malware, you lads would be my favorite idiots.
>>55458593
common sense isn't something you buy
that box is fake
>>55455604
MBAM+Hitman
>>55458740
refute it faggot
there's no reason to pay for software
there's no reason to look at ads
there's no reason to pay for entertainment
they're the ones who chose to monetize what should have stayed a hobbyist niche
not my problem :^)
>>55455604
i just run malwarebytes every now and then
dunno what else to use
used to have avast but it made booting up so slow i just said fuck it
>>55459725
>Clam
hitman
>>55459942
any reviews of it other than fucking cnet and sourceforge?
>>55455604
Bitdefender
>>55460000
trust
>>55456303
av a shit, only idiots get infected
-experienced xp user
I feel pretty bad for poorfags who have a bitcoin miner running in the background unknowingly as they shitpost about how they ~aren't infected~ and ~just use common sense xD~ as they download torrents freely
>>55457491
if it's a privilege escalation exploit how is it gotta escalate if you already admin
dummy
>>55460101
The idiots using AV are more likely to get infected: a clever user with no AV is better off than a retard with AV.
>>55460835
What sort of logic is this?
