[Ham-Computers] Anti Virus - the age-old debate

Sat May 12 02:28:29 EDT 2012

Thanks.  I decided to actually reply since virus/malware Q's are hot issues.
I actually have POP downloaded all the QTH.NET list messages I'm subscribed to
since "disappearing", but the method of access (POP mail) isn't as conducive
to answering questions in a timely way unlike when I had access to an Exchange
Server - so I've stayed on the sidelines.  If there was a way to implement
incoming e-mail rules on my phone, I'd be more active on the list.  As it is
now, all QTH.NET list posts are come straight into my list "inbox" unsorted
and that's a pain to deal with on a phone.  Outlook and Exchange Server have
this function, but Outlook is desktop only and Exchange is $$$.  So, I
download QTH.NET messages once a week/month/whenever to Outlook, run the
rules, and peruse the messages when I can.  I also participated in a couple of
online support forums for a short time, but started taking too much
time/effort and "disappeared" there too.  Some "life changes" occurred since I
was last active on this list and I was away for so long that it wasn't easy to
want to jump back in.  But...

This week I've been answering a bunch of questions about malware and spam from
friends who thought their e-mail accounts were hacked.  And, I've spent much
time cleaning malware from people's PC's.  So when I saw a similar subject on
the ham-computers list come up, I thought I'd chime in and through in my two
pennies.

I'll try to chime in once in a while, but there have been periods of weeks
between downloading of messages.  Now that I've actually posted something(s),
perhaps I'll be diligent in reading the messages.  So, how long?  The silence
will be deafening!

73,

  - Aaron, NN6O

p.s.  Yes, you can see I'm still as wordy as ever!

-----Original Message-----
From: ham-computers-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:ham-computers-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of WA5CAB at cs.com
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 7:34 PM
To: ham-computers at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Ham-Computers] Anti Virus - the age-old debate

Aaron,

Well, well.  Welcome back.  Are you back for good, for "a while", or for
tonight?

In a message dated 05/11/2012 19:37:51 PM Central Daylight Time,
nn6o.lists at pacbell.net writes: 
> Hi all, it's been a while...
> 
> The problem lies in the fact that virii, malware, and spyware are 
> treated differently by security app vendors.  For years, some vendors 
> refused to add spyware detection as spyware itself (at the time) was 
> non-destructive and not considered a "virus".  They've since added 
> more malicious spyware and malware to their detection engines, but are 
> still cautious to add anything that's non-destructive or not 
> bot-forming - they leave that up to dedicated malware scanners.  Makes 
> sense from a marketing standpoint as most vendors have worked hard on 
> making their security suites smaller and faster and don't want to be 
> seen again as being slow blowtware.  It doesn't matter if end-users 
> need two or three products to fully protect their systems, our product 
> runs fast and does what it's designed to do - catch virii and 
> malicious malware.
> 
> With that said, no one product catches everything anyway, so full 
> protection still requires more than one product.  Microsoft Security 
> Essentials (MSE) is a quite good, esp since it's free.  It's now what 
> I recommend.  I previously recommended AVG Free, but it's now a bit 
> bloated and the annual version update causes some headaches (esp since 
> the version changes are basically look-and-feel things, not engine 
> changes).  So far, computers I've installed MSE on have been problem 
> free - except for one where the user "allowed" a trojan to run (and it 
> was one of the nasty ones - Sirefef.B).  I also tell people to 
> supplement MSE with a weekly Malwarebytes (MBAM) scan.
> 
> As for paid products, I switched back to NAV (Norton Anti-Virus) a 
> couple years ago (after a 8-year departure from NAV).  Prior to their 
> 2010 re-write, NAV was a slow, bloated mess.  But Symantec focused on 
> re-writing the whole thing and it's actually quite light on resources 
> now.  I'd prefer a more "traditional" user interface (e.g. pull-down 
> menus and check-boxes), and more granular options, but it does what 
> it's supposed to.  Even the installer is simple (a bit *too* 
> simplistic, if you ask me), but that's OK for most users.
> I'm not the only one who's switched back - the upated NAV has received 
> many favorable reviews.  The reason I went back to NAV?  It's often 
> *free* after rebates from some retailers (such as Fry's Electronics).  
> If you want network security too, then get NIS (Norton Internet 
> Security) - it's NAV with added network firewall and internet security 
> features.  The past 3-years, I've paid a total of $1.50 or for NIS 
> 2010, 2011, and 2012 (the cost of the stamps for the rebates).
> 
> But even with NIS, I still run an MBAM scan once or twice a month - so 
> far, MBAM hasn't picked-up anything that NIS hasn't.  When fixing 
> computers, I use AVG's Boot CD to do off-line scans, followed by MBAM 
> and MSE (if no other AV product is installed).  Some things do escape 
> all three and that's where things like ComboFix (use with caution!) 
> and "scraping by hand" come into play.
> 
> So there's my 2 cents.  MSE for free products, NAV or NIS for paid 
> products (almost free with rebates), and a MBAM (free) scan every few 
> weeks or so.
> 
> 73,
> 
>   - Aaron Hsu, NN6O
>     {nn6o}@arrl.net
>     . -..- - .-. .-   ".... . .- ...- -.--"
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
______________________________________________________________
Ham-Computers mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net

List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** 

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html