Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums

What AntiVirus do you use?


What AntiVirus do you use?  

305 members have voted

  1. 1. What AntiVirus do you use?

    • AntiVir
    • Avast
    • BitDefender
    • ClamWin
    • eTrust
    • F-Prot
    • F-Secure
    • Grisoft
    • Kaspersky
    • McAfee
    • NOD32
    • Norton
    • Online Scanner Only
    • Panda
    • Trend Micro
    • Other
    • None

Recommended Posts

AVG performs poorly. Avast doesn't do very well either

when it comes to detection, though its engine in

removing viruses from memory before Windows starts

up is quite good. My post in the Antivir forum some time

ago may be of interest.




After the above horrendous infection, I had switched

from AVG to Antivir's free Classic edition, which has quite

good detection capabilities due to a vast 700,000

database, but have since moved on to AOL's Kaspersky

plus Bitdefender 8. The main reason behind this is the

resident shield of this free Antivir version does not have

"Automatic" settings, leaving you with just a manual

"Interactive" option. See my post in this same forum.




The principle of operation of an antivirus program is

very much similar to that of a combat aircraft's

radar jammer. Setting Antivir to "Interactive" is like

setting the radar jammer to "Manual" mode.

Imagine flying a Tornado or F-15E into Iraq or Kosovo

with their jammers set to "Manual", when you are

simultaneously illuminated by countless ground and

airborne search, tracking and missile guidance radars.

One simply does not have time to react, thus

"Automatic" jamming modes are a must.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

Antivir is probably not only the best free AV, but its better than most if not all paid AVs as well.

Not to be rude, but it was your fault you got infected by telling Antivir to ignore the file it found. This is a commen error though, and is why I think HIPS and a lot of the time software firewall programs are useless. People will just press ok to anything.


That infection you described in that antivir forum link sounds to me like a smitfraud infection of some sort. It would have probably been cleaned up with superantispyware. Some AVs detect spyware, some dont. Prevex has an antispyware program so thats why it found it.


Bitdefender 8(I assume your using the free version since the newest one is 10 I believe) is a pretty good scanner, but I have gotten better results with antivir. AOL is ok, but for the limited functions that it has it uses lots of ram and scans slow.(compared to antivir or AVG witch have tons of options and use less ram)



Oh and you can set antivir to have automatic options when it scans, but not with the guard. While I guess thats a feature some will want, there is also a good reason for it not to exist. What if you download something and run it and your av wrongly detects it? Well if you told it to delete everything, then you just lost your file and will have to download it again. Sure you could tell it to quarantine, but thats just as annoying. Its better in my view to have it prompt you for action each time, because you should know what you do and don't want to run. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

clamav just to make sure I don't pass on an infection to M$ users.

Using Linux, you have a better chance of winning a super lottery than you do of getting infected.

There are no suspect sites, I browse wherever I want to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

I actually just tried a really slick linux distro. It was called SAM or something like that.(can be found on distrowatch)

Only problem was the hardware detection sucks like all the other distros I've tried. But it had lots of cool features. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
While I guess thats a feature some will want, there is

also a good reason for it not to exist. What if you

download something and run it and your av wrongly

detects it? Well if you told it to delete everything, then

you just lost your file and will have to download it again.

Sure you could tell it to quarantine, but thats just as




Thanks for the feedback.


The recent infection I had above was unintentional since

I had accidentally clicked "Ignore", when I actually

wanted to click "Delete". This would not have happened

if I had a shield or guard which had been set to

automatically delete or quarantine.


As mentioned by the Antivir people in their reply to

my post in their forum, the "Automatic" mode is only

available in their Premium version, which emphasizes

the importance of it, since the fact that people are willing

to pay for it indicates it is an essential feature.


If the antivirus program wrongly detects and deletes the

file, I think it is just a minor inconvenience and one could

just redownload the file with the shield or guard turned

off. Even more paltry, if it merely quarantines the file, it is

just a simple matter of retrieving it. This contrasts with

the huge risks involve if one were to actually be infected

with a nasty virus, or worse, several viruses which mess

up the whole system, including the registry. Worst case,

if it were to be one of those which invade the BIOS (and

the antivirus feature of the BIOS had not been turned on),

such as the infamous CIH virus, then one would

effectively kiss goodbye to the motherboard.


Probably the antivirus program with the most versatile

shield or guard settings is that of Norton. I remember

when I wanted to download a file, I merely set the

"Autoprotect" for last-ditch defense. I set it to react

when the file is "Run", i.e. only when it was executed.

Thus it would not detect and delete any files I wanted

to download and save on to my desktop, effectively

eliminating any erroneous detection and reaction which

you mentioned above. After it had been downloaded, I

would give it a manual scan just in case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

I guess then if you don't take the time to read what your doing, then yes you might need your programs to automatically do everything for you.

It may be a minor thing to you to possibly have your files deleted but to a lot of people that would be more of a pain than getting infected and having to run a scan. (especially if you never get real infections anyway, and your av is deleting good files, that would make most people quit using them all together.)


Norton is probably the second worst program you could put on your computer.(only behind mcafee)

But if you like it, more power to you I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Norton is probably the second worst program you could

put on your computer.


I didn't say it was that good, but efficient enough amongst

the antivirus programs of its time and against most of the

threats then.


I was using Norton 5.02 when I had the older computer

(a first-generation Pentium 166 with 40 Mb ram !) running

Windows 95, although it was supposed to run on Win 98.

Setting the "Autoprotect" to detect only when the file is

"Run", it had hardly any impact on system performance.

This was the setting I used actually when downloading

the deadly CIH virus from hacker websites onto my

desktop, to test its efficacy - which it did detect with

a manual scan.


With the later 6.0 versions meant for Windows 98 and XP,

it started using lots of system resources and attracting a

lot of criticism for this drawback.

Link to post
Share on other sites


I had (probably) the same infection over a year ago. AVG AV alerted, but could not touch the dreaded spywarequake (aka spyaxe, current incarnation appears to be Spylocked.) I was a total ignoramus. My initiation/interest in malware really started to kick off after that. Haven't really had an infection worthy of the name, since. All using Avast home.

I do think people can put a little too much stock in malware testing, with results (like the most recent) where only a few percentage points separates the leaders from where Avast (and currently AVG 7.5) are, in tested performance. For the average user, who isn't especially high risk, the real-world results are probably not much different. Unless you are unlucky enough to click on/open/allow script for a zero day exploit, in which case advanced heuristics might save you.

I do believe that a gram of prevention is worth a tonne of cure, but if you need that cure, there's nothing like having a handful of powerful cleaners handy.

Nice thing about Avast home, is that in operation, it's almost identical to the pro, except for ability to schedule a scan. It's extremely configurable, gives very few problems, and updates fast. As you mentioned, boot scans can be useful. (So can removing scumware in safe, once identified.)

So although Avira (which I've nothing against, by the way, I've used it and liked it) may perform better in testing, I wouldn't be surprised if in real world use Avast performs at least as well.

Just my two Ringit's worth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

Superantispyware and Smitfraudfix will both clean up that infection.(for future reference of course. :P)

I dislike avast for a few specific reasons:


In no particular order

1. No schedualed scanning, something almost essential for newbie users who will never scan on their own.

2. I dislike the interface, even the non skinned one. I just don't like the way its laid out at all.

3. Uses more ram, and you can say thats because it has more "shields" but a few of them are unnecessary.

4. I'm not convinced it is good at actually cleaning up viruses. On too many occasions have I seen that annoying yellow caution sign pop up over and over again even after avast had supposedly fixed/cleaned the infection.


AVG is super light and does the job. Antivir uses a little more ram but it has a superb cleaning/detection engine.

I would choose either of those above avast any day. :) Thats just my opinion, of course everyone feels different, but avast has let me down in the past when the other 2 have not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I use AVG free edition in the office and Avast in my home, but when my computer is under attack and the antivirus software doesn't work I run the free online process of infectedornot.com or bitdefender ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been using AVG for a few years. I had McAfee and Norton a while back (only because they were free trials) and was glad I never paid for them. LOL Nothing but problems with both of them. I've been very pleased with AVG's performance and have had numerous friends and family switch to it themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I use AVG free edition in the office ...


<_< That would be using it illegally.

"not for commercial use, free for personal use only", you can use it at home though :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Normally I'd use Norton AntiVirus, so I chose that one, but currently I'm using Avast because of the fact Norton Antivirus is expired and my dad is too penurious to extend my membership >_>.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that counts as an anti-virus software.... honestly, get rid of it. I heard it is total crap, and that it is really poor in protecting your computer. There is a topic on this forum somewhere for the best free programs to use.



Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

AVG, but I have used Avast, NOD32, Norton(yuck). Gonna try ClamWin on my XP machine as soon as I change the power supply.

Link to post
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...