Do you use an anti-virus software?

Do you use an anti-virus software?

  • Total voters
    63
Yes. Switched to a 5dev Norton Security license this year - great reviews and $10 AR. Bitdefender Suite before that which, while effective, was resource heavy.

Also run Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Pro (lifetime license) and Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit (free version).
 
Windows defender only coupled with extreme caution on sites visited and links clicked.

I was running Norton 360, but I got so tired of nagging issues, settings not holding, ignoring set scanning schedules and doing whatever the heck it pleased.
 
I voted yes, but I'll qualify that by saying that I have most of the real-time scan engines disabled except for email. Only do manual scans with AVG and Malwarebytes periodically, plus I use Ad Blocker and a host file ad blacklist to round things out. Always comes back clean. I pretty much have a set group of reputable site that I visit regularly and I never download anything remotely questionable. Haven't had a virus since 2007.
 
Lazy8s said:
Windows defender only coupled with extreme caution on sites visited and links clicked.

I was running Norton 360, but I got so tired of nagging issues, settings not holding, ignoring set scanning schedules and doing whatever the heck it pleased.
Click to expand...
I think you'd be pleasantly surprised by Norton Security. I swore off Norton years ago (used to use Norton Systemworks), so my threshold for even considering moving back was very high. My experience thus far has been very good (at this point only using it on two machines ... Win8.1 desktop, Win10 laptop).
 
Is Windows 8.1's built-in Windows Defender "good enough" as anti-virus software or should I use the more "hardcore" ones like Norton and the like?
 
I've been running ESET along with system-wide ad blocker for years on my main PC, and I check my linux auth logs. I'd like to think no one but the NSA can penetrate my defenses :lol:


EDIT: LMAO, someone is trying to get access to my server as I type this :lol: :lol: :lol: Time to block some subnets!

Code: 
Feb 17 17:18:09 ngz sshd[12206]: Failed password for root from 60.173.14.146 port 27951 ssh2
Feb 17 17:18:09 ngz sshd[12197]: Failed password for root from 202.109.143.42 port 18304 ssh2
Feb 17 17:18:09 ngz sshd[12206]: Received disconnect from 60.173.14.146: 11: Normal Shutdown, Thank you for playing [preauth]
Feb 17 17:18:09 ngz sshd[12197]: Received disconnect from 202.109.143.42: 11: Normal Shutdown, Thank you for playing [preauth]
Feb 17 17:18:10 ngz sshd[12210]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=182.92.236.44  user=root
Feb 17 17:18:11 ngz sshd[12210]: Failed password for root from 182.92.236.44 port 27225 ssh2
Feb 17 17:18:12 ngz sshd[12212]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=60.173.14.146  user=root
Feb 17 17:18:12 ngz sshd[12210]: Received disconnect from 182.92.236.44: 11: Bye Bye [preauth]
Feb 17 17:18:14 ngz sshd[12217]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=182.92.236.44  user=root
Feb 17 17:18:14 ngz sshd[12212]: Failed password for root from 60.173.14.146 port 28162 ssh2
Feb 17 17:18:14 ngz sshd[12212]: Received disconnect from 60.173.14.146: 11: Normal Shutdown, Thank you for playing [preauth]
Feb 17 17:18:15 ngz sshd[12214]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=202.109.143.42  user=root
Feb 17 17:18:16 ngz sshd[12217]: Failed password for root from 182.92.236.44 port 28128 ssh2
Feb 17 17:18:16 ngz sshd[12217]: Received disconnect from 182.92.236.44: 11: Bye Bye [preauth]
Feb 17 17:18:16 ngz sshd[12214]: Failed password for root from 202.109.143.42 port 18898 ssh2
Feb 17 17:18:16 ngz sshd[12214]: Received disconnect from 202.109.143.42: 11: Normal Shutdown, Thank you for playing [preauth]
Feb 17 17:18:17 ngz sshd[12219]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=60.173.14.146  user=root
Feb 17 17:18:18 ngz sshd[12223]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=182.92.236.44  user=root
Feb 17 17:18:19 ngz sshd[12219]: Failed password for root from 60.173.14.146 port 28424 ssh2
Feb 17 17:18:20 ngz sshd[12219]: Received disconnect from 60.173.14.146: 11: Normal Shutdown, Thank you for playing [preauth]
Feb 17 17:18:20 ngz sshd[12223]: Failed password for root from 182.92.236.44 port 29036 ssh2
Feb 17 17:18:20 ngz sshd[12223]: Received disconnect from 182.92.236.44: 11: Bye Bye [preauth]
Feb 17 17:18:21 ngz sshd[12225]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=202.109.143.42  user=root
Feb 17 17:18:22 ngz sshd[12227]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=60.173.14.146  user=root
Feb 17 17:18:23 ngz sshd[12229]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=182.92.236.44  user=root
Feb 17 17:18:23 ngz sshd[12225]: Failed password for root from 202.109.143.42 port 19438 ssh2
Feb 17 17:18:23 ngz sshd[12225]: Received disconnect from 202.109.143.42: 11: Normal Shutdown, Thank you for playing [preauth]

Of course, they're all originating from China. Trying to brute-force my root password, psh.
 
Last edited:
I still use AVG although there have been periods where I remove it and go naked for a few weeks. I find that AVG has generally been the best of the free ones, especially for gaming. I just keep it as a safety net type thing and usually does not get in my way.
 
Lupine said:
I think you'd be pleasantly surprised by Norton Security. I swore off Norton years ago (used to use Norton Systemworks), so my threshold for even considering moving back was very high. My experience thus far has been very good (at this point only using it on two machines ... Win8.1 desktop, Win10 laptop).
Click to expand...

Same here. I'll check out the differences....I don't believe I have any issues on either of my primary machines, but a strong 3rd party app would probably set me a bit more at ease.
 
Meteor_of_War said:
I have that Microsoft Security Essentials thingy installed on all my computers, but I never run it.
Click to expand...
You shouldn't need to do a scan unless you're paranoid (or you put it on an already infected machine). The realtime protection does a good job.

I also use MSE.
 
DeathKnight said:
You shouldn't need to do a scan unless you're paranoid (or you put it on an already infected machine). The realtime protection does a good job.

I also use MSE.
Click to expand...

Yeah I figured as much.

But if you don't run scans often the icon turns from green to yellow/orange and says "potentially unprotected."

It doesn't seem logical since it has "real-time protection," yet says you are potentially unprotected from not running a scan.:hmm:
 
Meteor_of_War said:
Yeah I figured as much.

But if you don't run scans often the icon turns from green to yellow/orange and says "potentially unprotected."

It doesn't seem logical since it has "real-time protection," yet says you are potentially unprotected from not running a scan.:hmm:
Click to expand...

if you got an ssd its pretty fast as well, I only ever run it when it nags me

I find it nuts that people still think they don't need one! and more to the point they 'know' they don't have a virus

...especially mac users, always makes me smile when someone I know with a mac gets a virus, or uses a non mac and is like, how is this possible, macs are faster than pc's, how dare your computer start quicker!
 
Yup, I used to use Kaspersky (sp??) and loved it, but avast free has evolved nicely and convinced me that its good enough to replace Kaspersky.
 
Meteor_of_War said:
Yeah I figured as much.

But if you don't run scans often the icon turns from green to yellow/orange and says "potentially unprotected."

It doesn't seem logical since it has "real-time protection," yet says you are potentially unprotected from not running a scan.:hmm:
Click to expand...
Do you have scheduled scan turned on in the settings? If it's turned on it will nag you if it doesn't actually get around to running scans on its own. I turn it off and I've never got any scan nags.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top