What anti virus software are you ruinning?

[RThurmont]

I am not actually ruining any anti-virus software at the moment.

[Bounty]

AVG free.

They don't try to get good habits in you, they don't attack the root of the problem, they just are fancy, very resource hungry pattern matchers that in no way are worth anything they cost.

I love the smell of snob in the morning "Look at me, I'm so UBEH 1337 I don't need an anti-virus!! "

Yeah, well, good for you, but some of us don't like living on the edge.

Oh look, you're talking about Windows. He's running Linux.

So it's allright because he just assumes everyone uses his obscure OS?

That still doesn't justify him telling people not to get an AV. Cost is not an issue when there are plenty of free AV suites, "resource hogging" is largely irrelevant on a modern PC unless you get Norton's bloatware, so the only reason not to have an AV is extreme hubris or the bizarre delusion that everyone who may at some point mail something to you is perfectly computer-savvy. Granted, it's possible he may not have any friends outside of the IT department.

Going on a public forum and telling people they don't need an AV if they have "good habits" is the height of arrogance and an grossly irresponsible thing to do, full stop. I don't give a shit how bulletproof he thinks he is.

[bilateralrope]

None. Never have, never will. Virus scan makes any computer slow and is a terrible, terrible "solution" to the problem. First, they are reactive, not preventive. They don't try to get good habits in you, they don't attack the root of the problem, they just are fancy, very resource hungry pattern matchers that in no way are worth anything they cost.

All it takes is one moment of carelessness for something to slip through. I run AVG free in case something manages to get through, say on software from a trusted source that slipped up, or chose to place the malware into their software. Considering that I like downloading random games from the internet, any one of which could have a virus slipped in with them, I feel that not having an anti-virus software is risking things a bit. The only way I could be more careful is to avoid downloading all programs unless I check their source code myself, but I'm too lazy for that even if I could do it.

I'm acutally a bit suprised that I haven't gotten my computer infected by anything yet, and I do plan to format it and reinstall when I do get it infected.

As for the preformance issue, when I've had games that my machine can't quite handle I've turned off the anti-virus software only to have no noticable improvment.

The right thing to do is run as a limited user and not be a fucking idiot. Do those two things, and you will never get a virus.

I've heard of too many programs that won't work with xp unless in admin mode for me to think that running seperate admin and user accounts is worth the effort for me.

But this is only because I know that there are windows viruses in the wild. I dont think there are any linux viruses in the wild, so I probably wouldn't bother with an anti-virus if I was running linux.

[Xisiqomelir]

AVG free.
I love the smell of snob in the morning "Look at me, I'm so UBEH 1337 I don't need an anti-virus!! "

Yeah, well, good for you, but some of us don't like living on the edge.

Oh look, you're talking about Windows. He's running Linux.

So it's allright because he just assumes everyone uses his obscure OS?

Be fair to Destructionator here guys, I'm fairly sure that he means he doesn't use AV on the windows machines he administers.

[Arrow]

I'm currently using Avast, but I'm thinking of switching to AVG. Avast likes to eat up my CPU for a couple minutes after boot up, and that annoys the shit out of me.

[White Haven]

AVG. It's got a fucking SMALL footprint, and it gives a nice safety net. I think it's picked up something on one of my systems...once? But still, it's good to have there, and unless you're a fucking moron who schedules background scans while using it, its impact on system performance is effectively nil. Translation: Fuck off, D.

[phongn]

McAffee VirusScan Enterprise Edition 8i

[Argosh]

What do you have? Do you like it? Ideally, which would you choose??

I'm using Symantec AV. Yep. Maybe F-Secure.

[Alferd Packer]

No AV. I don't surf the web at all on my Windows machine; it's for gaming only. All my web browsing and email is done from my Linux machines.

[Mad]

ClamWin Free Antivirus. An open-source antivirus scanner? Sure, why not?

It doesn't have a real-time scanner (yet), but I can scan files or folders by right-clicking on them and can have scheduled scans.

[Laird]

Mcafee

[Bounty]

You always assume everyone is an expert of the system who is out to get you, and act accordingly.

Aren't we clever. No, I don't expect anyone I interact with to be an expert. I expect them to be the kind of ifiot who forwards the script kiddie's junk or gets his PC turned into a zombie.

These programs take time to install, maintain, and run.

That's your only argument? You seriously expect people to execute email attachments in sandboxes, but installing an AV is an insurmountable challenge?

You want to know how much "time" and "effort" my antivirus costs me? Five minutes to install it, three seconds to allow it through the firewall. Eerything else is automated. Scans, mail scans, definition updates. No effort whatsoever - and the expense in CPU cycles and memory is negligable.

And for that outrageous cost I have both active and passive protection. That's the cost/benefit analysis I did and that's the reason why my AV stays and why I recommend one to any person who bothers to ask.

ETA: and what sort of magic fairy land do you live in where computer users aren't idiots? The people I try to help usually can't tell their CD drive from a cup holder.

[FSTargetDrone]

I don't normally have AVG's active scan on during the day, but it's set to download any updates in the morning around 09:50. At 02:00 I have my hardware firewall stop all incoming and outgoing access and at 02:15 the AV scanner runs. E-mail scan is added to Eudroa with AVG, and it scans incoming and outgoing mail. One of my access providers (SNiP) scans all incoming mail on thier end, and about 3 or 4 of them are intercpeted a month that way (I get automated reports from SNiP concerning any problems).

Frankly all ISPs should routinely be scanning their incoming and outgoing mail.

[Xisiqomelir]

Potential for glorious flamewar here, it seems.

I'm going to second Alferd Packer about how Microsoft operating systems ideally should never see packets originating from outside their local subnet. Also, Bounty is correct in that the average clueless user does not have the sophistication to run at reduced privileges etc, and as a result we all suffer as the internet backbones are clogged with spam from the massive windows botnets.

[The Grim Squeaker]

AVG Free.
Free and simple, thank you very much. (Though I've installed Kasparky AV on my mum's computer instead of the hog known as Norton)

[ThatGuyFromThatPlace]

Aren't we clever. No, I don't expect anyone I interact with to be an expert. I expect them to be the kind of ifiot who forwards the script kiddie's junk or gets his PC turned into a zombie.

By you there, I didn't mean you, but rather a hypothetical competent administrator. A good security plan is not based on the fact that everyone are idiots, it is based on the assumption that you are up against malicious experts. Hence why you never depend on hiding facts, you never depend on them not pressing that button that spells your doom. You never depend on them using the same old stupid attacks over and over again.

Think of it as a game of chess: will you make a move that opens up your king to take his piece and hope that the other player just doesn't see and take advantage of your blunder? Only if you are an idiot yourself.

That's your only argument?

That and the assertation that the threat is negligible after basic precautions you should be making anyway, making whatever benefits the AV has not very important.

I am going to admit that most my experience with AV is from Norton and McAfee, and that is from where much my ire about performance comes. AVG seems to be much better than those, but I still stand by that after basic precautions, it isn't really needed.

You seriously expect people to execute email attachments in sandboxes, but installing an AV is an insurmountable challenge?

I expect them to not run email attachments at all unless it is absolutely necessary, at which point you sandbox it just in case you are wrong about the sender. Very little gets through that screen, and it is very little hassle, since again, you aren't going to be running most attachments anyway.

ETA: and what sort of magic fairy land do you live in where computer users aren't idiots?

I again point you to my chess analogy. Most are idiots, but you never make a move based on that assumption.


After looking at it, I am willing to make one concession: with good AV software, you are slightly better off than without. Let me rank from most protected to worse:

1) Your plan + my plan. (Competence, disaster recovery plan, limited account, and AV that doesn't suck just in case something slips through.)

2) My plan alone. (Limited account, responsible usage, no AV)

3) Good AV alone. (Running as admin with a decent AV program as your only line of defence)

4) Nothing. (Running as admin with no AV at all)

5) Bad AV. (Resource hog and false sense of security, running as admin)

Except that your chess analogy fails in one particularly large point; in chess you don't make a move based on the assumption that your opponent may be an idiot because if he's smarter than that you will lose.

In computers, you don't do anything based on the assumption that whoever's emailing you is competent, becasue if they aren't you'll get a virus, even if you're assuming that there are malicious experts out to get you all it takes is one email from you're mother or your office or wherever a less than fully competent computer owner lies and BAM, you got a virus, limited user account not-withstanding, no ammount of competence and securiyt minded-ness will catch that one email from a 'friendly'who just isn't as security conscious as you are.

While Anti-viral programs hog resources and are purely reactive, they are the only way to tell if a virus has gotten through your wall of security-mindedness unless you plan on going through all of your files and registries looking for that one disguised file (that could even use DRM/rootkit style securoty holes to be invisible to a user) that will hard-crash/zombify your computer.
If only there was a program to do all that tedious work for you!
Security mindedness/caution/limited user accounts are a good way to prevent infections, sure. But they also present a false sense of security because until your computer actually crashes/goes zombie you won't know whether your caution was enough.

[Icehawk]

Running Nod32.

[Rogue 9]

AVG Free.

[Vendetta]

ClamXAV

Although all three wild OSX viruses use iChat as a vector, and I don't, it's best to have a scanner that I can use to check over files before forwarding them, so that I don't inadvertently give a windows lurgy to someone.

[Xisiqomelir]

ClamXAV

Although all three wild OSX viruses use iChat as a vector, and I don't, it's best to have a scanner that I can use to check over files before forwarding them, so that I don't inadvertently give a windows lurgy to someone.

Are you talking about Leap-A etc? They aren't technically viruses.

[Darth Quorthon]

McAfee Internet Security Suite 2007. It will be "free" once (if) I get all of my rebates.

[Vendetta]

Are you talking about Leap-A etc? They aren't technically viruses.

Technically, 90% of all "viruses" aren't. Usually they're a worm or a trojan. However, that's just splitting hairs, they're Bad Stuff, you should avoid Bad Stuff.