Is Symantec Really The Best In Security ?

[bluedragon 0]

INTRODUCTION

Secunia has tested the ability of various high-profile Internet Security Suites to detect exploitation of

vulnerabilities.

For a long time, we have been quite convinced that anti-virus products would exhibit poor performance in this

discipline, given the name “anti-virus” which suggests a limited focus (though customers may still expect to

be protected).

This is why secunia decided to test some more “high-end” product bundles that are being marketed as

comprehensive Internet Security Suites, thus leaving the impression that the user is “fully protected against

all Internet threats”.

 

ranked by discovery rate based on all test case

 

Norton - 21.33%

BitDefender - 2.33%

TrendMicro - 2.33%

McAfee - 2.00 %

OneCare - 1.67 %

Kaspersky - 1.00 %

Avg - 1.00 %

F-Secure - 1.00 %

Panda - 1.00 %

ZoneAlarm - 1.00%

CA - 0.67 %

Norman - 0%

What Security Suite do you use ?

 

 

 

 

_{source : http://blogs.flexerasoftware.com/vulnerability-management/2008/10/symantec-beats-the-competition.html}

 

Notice from electriic ink:

Copied from http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ and http://blogs.flexerasoftware.com/vulnerability-management/2008/10/symantec-beats-the-competition.html Condensed and quoted.

Edited October 19, 2008 by electriic ink (see edit history)

[xpress 0]

Yeah, I already read this article. Symantec is the winner of their tests. But none of them are perfect. I don't really believe in these Internet Security suites. Most of them are really can't provide the optimal security for the users. They are waste of our money. And it was proved. I think staying with free softwares will save money for people. They will provide the same level protection. For example, instead of paying for a complete security suite we can install a good free Antivirus like Avira, a free Spyware detector like Ad-Aware and a firewall like Kerio Personal Firewall or Ashampoo firewall. They will provide most of the security proivded by these so called Internet suites. And applying atleast major security patches regularly will also gives users more security.

Edited October 19, 2008 by xpress (see edit history)

[bluedragon 0]

@Xpress - I somewhat agree with you but these result doesn't mean we stop using a Good Security Suite. It only means that we should use continuously apply patches as and when they are released. But then, I've had bad experiences with patches also :)I had a licensed version of ZoneAlarm and it really screwed up my system. Then I bought Kaspersky Internet Security Suite. :PI know it has bad scores but then I can't help it, at least it detects my Viruses well.I guess AntiVirus' companies should concentrate more on their engines.

[xpress 0]

@Xpress - I somewhat agree with you but these result doesn't mean we stop using a Good Security Suite. It only means that we should use continuously apply patches as and when they are released. But then, I've had bad experiences with patches also

Yeah I agree. But I am not saying to stop using Security Suites. What I mean is, these Internet Security Suites are costly. But they are not providing the perfect security. Free Softwares also providing that much of security. So, my point is, If the free softwares can provide that much security, then why should we pay for these Security suites?
And I agree with you about the patches. Some times these patches will cause problems, and they need patches. Patches need patches to solve the problems created by these patches...really funny.

[Ashara 0]

I use Kapersky, mostly because I got it free with the laptop I bought. I've had little to no issues with it.I try to keep everything up-to-date with patches etc.Other members of the family uses McAfee and the one member that does use Symantic complains about it all the time.

[rpgsearcherz 5]

I actually don't use any antivirus/antispyware at all anymore...Just been around so long that I've learned how to avoid them altogether,lol.I would honestly refer people to AVG over any other though. As far as I know it is the only one that is updated daily. Most others are like every Saturday or whatever.

[Saint_Michael 3]

To start off I answer the first question and say at one time Symantec was the best since in the 90's that and McAfee were the only big companies, that I am aware, that provided security for computers. However, because of the big tech boom of the late 90's and early 2000-2002, a lot more software developers started showing up and so your options are not as limited anymore. What is scary though that the free versions of the anti-virus software are a lot faster, current, and don't suck a computer dry and so people are dropping Norton and Mcafee for AVG, NOD and so on. Of course, the other side of the issue is that it is the users and not the software, because most users just don't think about it, look at my topic about the 30 million years who get caught but the fake software. If computers sit down and google or yahoo computer security and visit computer websites that deal with security or read news articles about computer security. Then the impact of all these viruses, malware, spyware, scareware and all the other ware's you can think of wouldn't have such a impact as it does now. However, the sad case is that no one will learn until they get low blowed and catch a nasty virus or get their computer hack will they take their computer security more serious. Heck even the most experience computer users get caught and most of them are in the top echelon of computer experts.

[joeblogg 0]

symantic probably is the best but not by much. i personally use free security software of the internet from iobit.com and pctools.com. iobit is great because their main product: advanced windows care has every thing in one - spyware removal, security defence, registry fix, optimization, startup help, privacy sweeper and junk file cleaner, all in one program!. on pc tools there is a program called registry mechanic which is great but it only does registry advance windows care does everything lol. and iobit also has defrag which is very good. i highly recommend iobit. pc tools is just as good but less handy; its all in like 10 different programs rather than one.better than symantic i'd say.

[TastyKlair 0]

Wow, I can't believe a post about computer security programs only got 7 replies so for, and a week of silence! On most other boards I've been so, it seems like that's one topic that is feverishly debated - though must of the feverish debating is not whether to use programs like Norton, but rather just how horrible they are.I think most anti-Norton people I know use Clam-Win. Personally I use Norton 360. I'm not a fan of some of the quirks Norton builds that protect most simple computer users but hinder/annoy users who know what they're doing. The biggest irritations for me is 1) the issues (mainly with firewalls) when I try and network new computers and 2) the amount of memory it uses since it's such a huge program. I deal with those issues and I'm pretty happy otherwise. I'm generally a big fan of "all in one" anything, one-stop-shopping, set-it-and-forget, so having one program without having to monitor separate anti-virus, firewalls, backups, etc., is just too convenient. Also, my husband is not nearly as computer literate, so it's nice knowing that those same annoyances can help protect the computer from him!