complimentary antivirus

[kisianik]

Hi

Simple question.

What complimentary antivirus would you recommend (I hope it is not Norton), because malwarebytes (MBAM for short) has similar functions now (was using MBAM since v1.5) as many antivirus programs and I don't want compatibility issues, and also 2 programs fighting for the same malware, so to speak.

Thanks

[Telos]

Most all AV programs will work fine w/MBAM. I would recommend a basic AV that doesn't have extra anti-malware features, as MBAM provides that. Avast Free is one option, but there are many others. All are compatible w/MBAM although you may need to set exclusions in both programs for the other.

[kisianik]

3 hours ago, Telos said:

Most all AV programs will work fine w/MBAM. I would recommend a basic AV that doesn't have extra anti-malware features, as MBAM provides that. Avast Free is one option, but there are many others. All are compatible w/MBAM although you may need to set exclusions in both programs for the other.

Thanks

You got 100% on my questions. The question was not about compatibility, as I do know that most major AV are compatible with MBAM.  " Basic AV that doesn't have extra anti-malware features" - which ones from commercial versions, as I want automatic updates and close to 100% detection rates and less false positives.

Appreciate your help

 

[Porthos]

Ii you are using Windows 10 a perfectly good AV is already built-in. Defender.

Malwarebytes Premium complements it well. 

Edited August 19, 2017 by Porthos

[Telos]

You are welcome!

[lock]

17 hours ago, kisianik said:

close to 100% detection rates and less false positives

As per latest AV-Comparatives , you have Avast !, AVG, F-Secure, Panda, Symantec, Trend Micro  with 100% detection by themselves .

Adding MBAM to these antiviruses will not get you 101% detection rate.

[TempLost]

47 minutes ago, lock said:

As per latest AV-Comparatives , you have Avast !, AVG, F-Secure, Panda, Symantec, Trend Micro  with 100% detection by themselves .

Adding MBAM to these antiviruses will not get you 101% detection rate.

Nobody, absolutely nobody, in the real world is going to get 100% detection rates of viruses and malware. You can provide test results showing 100% detection rate of a group of test samples but it means little to the end user, apart from giving them a false sense of security.

Backing up your computer(s) regularly to at least two other locations, exercising common sense in web browsing and email handling, and using Malwarebytes Premium alongside a reputable and trusted antivirus package of your choice is what I recommend to those who ask my advice. And my personal preference is to use CryptoPrevent as well as taking regular registry backups with Tweaking.com's Registry Backup.

[lock]

7 hours ago, TempLost said:

in the real world is going to get 100% detection rates of viruses and malware

The 100% detection rate mentioned in AV Comparatives is as practical as it is possible in a rational world. You can use 5 antiviruses at the same time and still, theoretically you will not get an absolute 100%.

From a practical point of view, using only one antivirus with a tested detection rate of 100%  it is more than enough, to achieve a balance between impact on performance of your PC, cost and conflicts.

While I agree that backup is a must have  ( you pay once for a backup program) running MBAM  along a well performing antivirus is a waste of money and pc resources ; nobody yet tested MBAM in any official test, so just supposing that 2 programs are better than one will give you a false sense of security.

As I said many times, I never got an alert from MBAM while used with a well known antivirus; always the antivirus detected all, leaving nothing for MBAM.

[TempLost]

So, do I read you correctly - you don't use Malwarebytes in active mode now at all?

[lock]

I used for years ( I have 5 lifetime licenses) but not anymore.

[kisianik]

21 hours ago, lock said:

The 100% detection rate mentioned in AV Comparatives is as practical as it is possible in a rational world. You can use 5 antiviruses at the same time and still, theoretically you will not get an absolute 100%.

From a practical point of view, using only one antivirus with a tested detection rate of 100%  it is more than enough, to achieve a balance between impact on performance of your PC, cost and conflicts.

While I agree that backup is a must have  ( you pay once for a backup program) running MBAM  along a well performing antivirus is a waste of money and pc resources ; nobody yet tested MBAM in any official test, so just supposing that 2 programs are better than one will give you a false sense of security.

As I said many times, I never got an alert from MBAM while used with a well known antivirus; always the antivirus detected all, leaving nothing for MBAM.

If I may ask - which AV are you using now? Can this AV run in the safe mode? I am asking, because recently I got Ransomware in the RAR package, which I opened.... MBAM was very helpful in the Safe Mode - all gone.

But MBAM has a lot false positives in "Potentially Unwanted Applications" - it attempted to kill even Chrome!

I was thinking opposite. MBAM for malware of any kind and AV just for viruses, that what I mean by complimentary in the first place.

Appreciate everyone's input on this matter.

[lock]

I had MBAM and MSE4.10 for several years, after that I switched to NOD 32 and now to Bitdefender free and PC Tools firewall (on a Win 7 / 64 pc).

MBAM and MSE made a very good combination without overlapping protection but had a serious impact on browsing ( like 1 sec delay) and never got ANYTHING in quarantine of MBAM after several years.

Nod 32 is good but overcomplicated for an average user.

Bitdefender Free has zero impact on my pc and has the same level of protection as paid, with a detection rate of 100%

I do not know if it is running in safe mode, but for disinfection there are a lot of tools to use, beside the paid version of MBAM.

[kisianik]

3 hours ago, lock said:

I had MBAM and MSE4.10 for several years, after that I switched to NOD 32 and now to Bitdefender free and PC Tools firewall (on a Win 7 / 64 pc).

MBAM and MSE made a very good combination without overlapping protection but had a serious impact on browsing ( like 1 sec delay) and never got ANYTHING in quarantine of MBAM after several years.

Nod 32 is good but overcomplicated for an average user.

Bitdefender Free has zero impact on my pc and has the same level of protection as paid, with a detection rate of 100%

I do not know if it is running in safe mode, but for disinfection there are a lot of tools to use, beside the paid version of MBAM.

I liked NOD32 before, till version 8. Considering it now. It is not complicated for me. Had Bitdefender Free before NOD32, but it was more than 10 years ago, I think. Back then it was not so versatile. I will give it a try, free version of course. I don't think Bitdefender would have any impact on my gaming PC (4790K overclocked and other good stuff).

What I like about MBAM, in addition to its features, is this forum. Very helpful staff, not like the others.

Thanks for advice.

Edit. PC Tools Firewall is no more, last supported Win OS is Win7. I have Win 8.1 with ClassicShell (makes it look and feel like Win7). And I saw reports on Cnet that Win 8.1 is not working properly with PC Tools Firewall.

Edited August 21, 2017 by kisianik