NOD32 or Kaspersky?

[NetRyder]

Oh jpom...I thought you were referring to a test that gave AVG a 99% detection rate.
I know NOD32 and Kaspersky are great pieces of software, and the latter has consistently proved to have the best detection rates. I was talking about AVG when I said "it's far from being the best." Guess there was a bit of miscommunication there.

 

[j79zlr]

I use AVG simply because I've seen the free version pick up plenty that an updated NAV or McAfee missed. This is by design however, depepnding on whether you have the extended threats def's offered by NAV, it will not signal some spyware/adware/malware as viruses/trojans/worms, but AVG will detect them. My real beef with NAV is that is has a tendency to crash and for no reason, I've seen this in atleast 5 seperate unrelated incidents on PC's without any problems. LiveUpdate breaks, and does not let you know it broke, then you have to fully remove NAV and reinstall it. I used to do this weekly on my Uncle's computer until I finally just put AVG on it. I have a small test sample, maybe 50 PC's I've moved from NAV to AVG, all who used to have serious virus problems, to hardly none at all. "Unbiased" tests don't really carry much salt especially when I have seen this first hand.

EDIT

I also don't trust that particular test, when they are lying in the first two sentences.

# The test was made on 02-16 April 2005, using Windows XP Professional SP1 on a P4 2600 Mhz, 512MB DDRAM.
#
All programs tested had the latest versions, upgrades and updates and they were tested using their full scanning capabilities e.g. heuristics, full scan etc.

=============

I do believe there have been plenty of updates e.g. SP2 for XP, by 04/16/05

 

[Android412]

I've used nod32 for a while now and have no complaints. I have used KAV in the past, but it didn't gel for me

I did the same thing, couldn't be happier.

 

[jpom]

Oh jpom...I thought you were referring to a test that gave AVG a 99% detection rate.
I know NOD32 and Kaspersky are great pieces of software, and the latter has consistently proved to have the best detection rates. I was talking about AVG when I said "it's far from being the best." Guess there was a bit of miscommunication there.

Doh, yeah I misread fishboys post, which meant in turn that I misread your response to him etc etc, my bad.

Oh well this entire thing has made me take a closer look at a few different anti-virus, knowledge is never a bad thing.

 

[Xie]

The thing I liked most about Kaspersky is that updated definitions hit their site a few times a day and you could update your definitions every hr if you wanted to.

 

[indyjones]

I have tried both kav and nod32, I am currently using nod32 as it seems to much less of a system muncher imo...

 

[FishBoy]

Re: NOD32 or kapersly?

Kaspersky is known to have better detection rates, but NOD32 is lighter on resources. It's a trade-off, so depending on your hardware configuration, pick which one you think is appropriate. They're both very good, and you won't go wrong with either one of them.

Interesting. Somehow I've never seen AVG fare well in any test I've looked at so far, yet there are people who continue to recommend it. I don't understand. Is it just because it's free?

oh hehe there it is my bad
ah so you'd recommend using kaspersky instead?
i dont really care about system resources on my computer in canada but on this computer here im keeping it on avg

 

[NetRyder]

Re: NOD32 or kapersly?

oh hehe there it is my bad
ah so you'd recommend using kaspersky instead?
i dont really care about system resources on my computer in canada but on this computer here im keeping it on avg

I'd say so. Being sensible and careful is far more important though. I've been using Symantec Corporate 9 for a long time (university license...woo), and Norton before that, and I've been virus-free for the last 7 years. No joke.

 

[j79zlr]

Have you ever used a AV product other that Symantec?

I used to think NAV was great until 2002 and after that, I have been less than impressed.

 

[LordOfLA]

Last virus I had was on my atari ST back in 1992.

I dont have AV going all the time but I have them around to run sweeps for the occasions where my curiosity overrides my common sense

 

[NetRyder]

Have you ever used a AV product other that Symantec?

I used to think NAV was great until 2002 and after that, I have been less than impressed.

Yes, I've used various trial versions at different points of time - NOD32, KAV, AVG (Free), McAfee (long, long time ago), PC-Cillin (again, several years ago), and of course, Norton's consumer line and the Corporate edition, which is significantly lighter in terms of resource usage.

I would have bought a NOD32 license if it hadn't killed my system. I tried uninstalling the trial, and it destroyed my setup (network/Winsock failures and all kinds of crazy stuff) forcing me to format and reinstall XP, for the first time in 3 years. Must have been some sort of conflict somewhere, but it works without a glitch for most people, and it's a great product.

That's the reason I've come back to Symantec Corp 9. I know it's not the best in its class anymore, but it's not poor either. I might look into Kaspersky again at some point, but I'm in no real rush. As I said, being a cautious user is the most important thing.

 

[tom9042]

When I saw this test last year, I wondered if there are more than one part of an antivirus program. The first part would be what this test looks for, the actual virus program. The antivirus program could inform you and delete the virus. A second part would be to wait until the virus executes, stop the execution, inform you and delete the virus. This second method of fighting viruses would have a smaller impact on the system, since it wasn't scanning as much. If this is true (and I'm not sure it is) then the test on www.virus.gr is only half a test.

I don't post on some topics, since my knowledge is too light. If someone can respond to my comments above, perhaps I can become a little smarter.

 

[LordOfLA]

Virus scanners have heuristic scanning - meaning thay can trace through program code and get an idea what its going to do without actually runnning the code. This is how they catch viruses that are unknown variants or misinterpret safe applications as dangerous.

 

[dpr]

Lots of great info here, keep it coming

 

[jpom]

Re: NOD32 or kapersly?

I'd say so. Being sensible and careful is far more important though. I've been using Symantec Corporate 9 for a long time (university license...woo), and Norton before that, and I've been virus-free for the last 7 years. No joke.

We use Symantec Anti-Virus 9.0 at work, and have found it to work excellently. I have also seen it used on personal pc's with no problems. I've tested SAV 10, and I have not found any problems with it, although it's "spyware detection" leaves a lot to be desired. I have found that SAV still takes up more resources then something like nod32, though not nearly as much say NAV2005. Also SAV only allows daily updates as opposed to the hourly updates offered by NOD32 and KAV, agin though that is not nearly as bad as the weekly updates offered by NAV, which is rediculous IMHO.

So I did try Kaspersky over the weekend, and I've already headed back to nod32, I found that Kaspersky did eat up good bit more resources, especially when updating etc. at which point if I was doing any gaming etc. the system would freeze and have to be rebooted, uninstalled and put nod32 back on and no problems since.

 

[Son Goku]

I've had a few viruses in the past: Ironically, I got them Microsoft's own install media...

- A computer I got back in 1995 came with a bundled set of MS-DOS 6.22 and win3.1 disks. The shrink wrapped MS-DOS 6.22 had a boot virus on disk 1, which I would incidently keep getting upon a fresh format/clean install. The disk came shrink wrapped, with all the official Microsoft EULA docs and everything included, not sure what was up with that...

I had various AV on my comp then, and it never seemed to get detected, until something (don't remember what anymore) detected it back in 1998. A scan of the disk showed the disk came infected (and the disk would't have got it from the PC, as I always kept the floppies write protected so there couldn't be any accidental deletions or what not...)

- Dont think my comp ever got it, but win 3.1 disk 5 had another virus on it, also came shring wrapped, yadda, yadda...

- A few years ago a format/fresh install resulted in my comp getting plasted by one of them worms, within a second of putting my IP info in, so I could go to Windows Update for the fixes for the dratted thing. Before I formatted, I was fine (when it was more prevalent) as I already was fully patched, had a firewall setup, etc...

I currently use McCaffee (had since Norton started that product activation, which I sort of do not prefer), along with Spy Bot and AdAware (for malware), though if something better has come along, I wouldn't be unamenable to giving some other product a look see...

 

[Son Goku]

FYI, after having started taking a network security class (for one of my electives in my computer networking major); I have learned of some things that I think are better left unmentioned, well in public forums in general...

Anyhow, I recently dumped McCaffee and installed Kaspersky. Updated the thing, and upon the first scan noticed 4 tojans which McCaffee didn't detect at all. It wasn't that I routinely go around opening strange email attachments (I don't, and have OE set to not display various images and other such objects automatically...

Anyhow what it found various stuff like this...

http://www.viruslist.com/en/search?VN=Trojan-Dropper.Win32.Small.jh

Like with any scan though (after the initial one) there was one folder I needed to exclude from scanning. Basically, when I was taking DBA 1 (database administrator), we needed Oracle 9i Enterprise. It's got the compressed archive zip files for that (extremely slow scanning, and archive files not likely to change)...

 

[j79zlr]

That dropper is usually classified as spyware/adware/malware and not necessarily a virus, so some products like NAV or McCrappee do not detect it without their extended database. Hairsplitting basically.

BTW small usually gets installed by browsing sites and not email. I believe it normally uses an ActiveX control so just ont using IE is one way to prevent it.

 

[luish]

I used to use NAV for years until i found NOD... I just love nod... best antivirus I've found.. maybe Kapersky is a bit better, I don't know.. but I am not willing to trade... NOD is good enough for me..

BTW, NOD in hebrew is FART .... lol

 

[Son Goku]

One other thing I noticed, an attack came in over the network connection. Let me preface this by saying that I'm currently using SP2's built in firewall. This does leave one question...

Does winXP firewall first (and Kaspersky was seeing what the firewall wasn't catching)? Or is it seeing it before the firewall does it's own blocking. I'm assuming the former is what occurs, so it was catching something the XP SP2 firewall didn't. Well anyhow, multiple layers in security can be a good thing.

There is one other thing I might test to see if it will catch this sorta thing; but I don't want to go into too many details about this sorta thing...

BTW, NOD in hebrew is FART .... lol

:laugh: