Over 1 million tech questions and answers.

Comodo Internet Security Premium 8 PCmag review

Q: Comodo Internet Security Premium 8 PCmag review

Shared Antivirus
The antivirus protection in this suite identical with Comodo Antivirus 8. You can read that review to get full details, but I'll summarize here.

Most of the labs I follow don't include Comodo in their testing. It did manage 16 of 18 possible points in AV-Test Institute's three-part antivirus test, which is good. However, Avira Internet Security Suite 2015 and Kaspersky Internet Security (2015) both managed a perfect 18 points in that same test.

In my own hands-on malware blocking test, Comodo detected 83 percent of the samples and scored 8.3 of 10 possible points, putting it a mere fraction behind Bitdefender Internet Security 2015. My Comodo contact pointed out that the software's automatic sandboxing feature doesn't kick in for files already present when the product is installed. I followed his instructions to test in such a way that auto-sandboxing would have a chance, but doing so didn't change the results.

Comodo's performance in my antiphishing test was utterly dismal. It hardly detected any fraudulent websites. In fact, its detection rate came in 94 percentage points below that of Symantec Norton Security, which consistently aces this test. My Comodo contact advised that the suite should do better at antiphishing and malicious URL blocking, so I reran the phishing test. After one new round of testing, I found no appreciable difference, so I didn't continue.

Tough Firewall
The firewall component resisted all my attempts to disable it programmatically, the way a malicious program might. It also successfully put all of the test system's ports in stealth mode, and fended off all my Web-based tests. Please read my review of Comodo Firewall 8for the nitty-gritty details.

Like ZoneAlarm Free Antivirus + Firewall 2015, Comodo doesn't attempt to detect exploit attacks at the network level. The standalone firewall did precisely nothing when I attacked it using 30-odd exploits generated by the CORE Impact penetration tool.

I frequently find that the antivirus component in a security suite will handle at least some of the exploits by wiping out their payload files, so I reran this test on the suite. Comodo wiped out the payload for 14 percent of the attacks, but that's all. The firewall component in Quick Heal AntiVirus Pro 16 likewise doesn't attempt to block exploits, but Quick Heal's antivirus detected over 40 percent of the malicious payloads.

Performance Testing Surprise
This suite just includes antivirus, firewall, and a few bonus security tools, so I was surprised to notice that its installation occupied over a gigabyte space on disk (determined by measuring free space before and after installation). I was even more surprised when my boot-time test averaged over 40 percent longer with Comodo installed than with no suite.

I repeated the test twice more, averaging 100 reboots for each test. The results hardly varied. Booting up the system took 42 percent longer with Comodo installed. Looking back at results for earlier Comodo versions, I found similar results?I had simply forgotten.

A script that moves and copies a huge collection of bulky files between drives took 27 percent longer with Comodo's real-time protection active, more than double the current suite average of 12 percent. Another script that zips and unzips that same file collection took 13 percent longer. The average for the zip/unzip test is 11 percent. It's possible you might notice Comodo's performance impact, especially when it comes to boot time.

Sub-Ratings:
Note: These sub-ratings contribute to a product's overall star rating, as do other factors, including ease of use in real-world testing, bonus features, and overall integration of features.
Firewall:
Antivirus:
Performance:
Antispam: n/a
Privacy:
Parental Control: n/a

Full Article

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 200
Preferred Solution: Comodo Internet Security Premium 8 PCmag review

I recommend downloading and running Reimage. It's a computer repair tool that has been proven to identify and fix many Windows problems with a high level of success.

I've used it in the past to identify and fix everything from blue screens (BSOD's), ActiveX errors, corrupt files and processes, dll/exe/sys errors, recover lost memory, Windows update problems, defragging, malware removal etc.

You can download it direct from this link http://downloadreimage.com/download.php. (This link will automatically start a download of Reimage that you can save to your computer.)

RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

You get a boatload of features with Comodo Firewall 8, and they don't cost you a thing. It does the job of a personal firewall, and its Viruscope malware detection system has evolved impressively. And there's the hardened browser, virtual desktop, and program sandboxing, the feature list goes on and on. My one concern is the popup-happy behavior-blocking system, which really needs to evolve into something that doesn't rely on user interaction. When it does so, we'll raise the rating back up to 4.5 stars.

Even with this one worry, Comodo hangs on to our Editors' Choice badge for personal firewalls. It shares that honor with ZoneAlarm Free Firewall 2015.

Full Article
 

A:Comodo Firewall 8 PCmag review

Got to love the reviewer comment on the HIPS:




The HIPS system wreaked havoc on my attempt to install 20 PCMag utilities. These utilities necessarily hook into various Windows processes, and Comodo suspected some type of malfeasance for most of them. Only seven installed and ran without incident. All the rest triggered anywhere from one to dozens of popups. I always chose to allow the reported action and remember my answer. Even so, in a couple of cases the popups just never stopped coming. Well, I gave up at two dozen; I figure the average user would get frustrated even sooner.Click to expand...

However in my opinion, the reviewer nails one thing right:




My one concern is the popup-happy behavior-blocking system, which really needs to evolve into something that doesn't rely on user interaction.Click to expand...


 

Read other 10 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

Decent Malware Blocking
In my own hands-on malware blocking test, Comodo scored 8.3 points out of a possible 10. That puts it on par with McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015 and just a hair behind Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2015. Panda Free Antivirus 2015 earned 8.0 points in this test. However, Panda received excellent ratings from many of the labs, and I weight those scores higher than my own simple hands-on testing. Quite a few products, Avast Free Antivirus 2015among them, have detected all the tweaked samples.

Interestingly, all of Comodo's malware detection occurred the instant I opened my folder of samples. It quickly and silently wiped out 83 percent of the samples, without bothering to announce what it had done. When I launched the samples that survived the initial massacre, it didn't actively block any of them.

I also exposed Comodo to a folder containing hand-modified versions of the same malware samples. I tweaked some non-executable bytes in each sample, and also changed each file's name and size. I was quite surprised to find that my simple tweaking prevented Comodo's signature-based detection system from recognizing more than half of the samples. This might suggest that its signatures need to be more open-ended and less restrictive.

Poor Blocking of Malicious URLs
Of course, in the real world you're very unlikely to simply open a folder containing malicious programs. If you encounter a malware attack, it will most likely come through a malic... Read more

A:Comodo Antivirus 8 PCmag review

thx
 

Read other 2 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

PROS
Stealths ports to protect against outside attack. Controls which programs can access network. Host Intrusion Prevention System (HIPS) flags suspicious program behaviors. Virtual desktop and secure browser. Free.

CONS
HIPS flags both good and bad programs. In testing, Website Filter didn't block any malware-hosting URLs. Automatic sandboxing disabled by default. No protection against exploit attacks.

BOTTOM LINE
Comodo Firewall 10 has a bold new look, but it's not just a pretty face. Under the hood, it includes full firewall protection along with a variety of related security features

more in the link above

 

A:Comodo Firewall 10 PCMag Review

Gotta stealth those ports or else you gonna get owned
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

ESET Internet Security 10 Review by PCMAG​
Article: ESET Internet Security 10

Features:

Basic Firewall
Home Network Protection
Banking and Payment Protection
Straightforward Antispam
Webcam Protection
Small Hit on Performance
Uneven Component Quality
Pros
Very good scores in lab tests and our tests. HIPS blocked many exploits. Speedy malware scan. Useful network map. Secure browser for banking. Simple spam filter handles POP3 and IMAP.

Cons
Firewall doesn't pass common tests. Mediocre antiphishing score. Parental control limited to content filtering.
Bottom Line
Antivirus is the best part of ESET Internet Security 10, but other components include an old-school firewall that fails some common tests and parental control that's limited to content filtering.

Read more: ESET Internet Security 10
 

A:ESET Internet Security 10 Review by PCMAG (3/5 stars)

I guess 10 for Smart Security hasn't come out yet?
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

Shared Antivirus
This suite builds on the antivirus protection found in the standalone G Data Antivirus 2015. Please read that review for full details regarding the testing that I've summarized below.

West Coast Labs certifies G Data's technology for virus detection, and it received VB100 certification in all of the recent Virus Bulletin tests that included it. In the latest test by AV-Test Institute, G Data received 6 of 6 possible points for protection against malware and totaled 16 of 18 possible points. That's good, but Kaspersky Internet Security (2015) at Amazon and Avira Internet Security Suite 2015 scored a perfect 18. The other labs that I follow don't include G Data.

In my own hands-on malware blocking test, G Data earned a respectable 9.3 points, beating almost all programs tested using the same malware collection. F-Secure Internet Security 2015 also managed 9.3 points, while Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Plus (2015) swept the field with a perfect 10 points.

G Data also fared well in my malicious URL blocking test. When exposed to 100 newly discovered malware-hosting URLs, it prevented 51 percent of the downloads, in most cases by blocking the browser from all access to the URL. The current average protection rate for this test is 40 percent.

The product's accuracy at blocking malware-hosting URLs didn't quite carry over into blocking fraudulent (phishing) websites. In this test, G Data's detection rate was 34 perc... Read more

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

Source: McAfee Internet Security (2016)

Pros Protects all your Windows, Mac OS, Android, and iOS devices. Antivirus rates high in lab tests and our tests. Accurate antiphishing and antispam. New True Key password manager offers multifactor authentication. Many bonus features.

Cons Firewall not fully protected. Minimal parental control. Mac OS support somewhat limited. iOS support very limited.

Bottom Line McAfee Internet Security (2016) includes the multitude of features found in McAfee's antivirus and adds accurate spam filtering, limited parental control, and an impressive password manager featuring serious multifactor authentication.

 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

Shared Antivirus
Avast's lab test scores range from best to worst. It received AAA-level certification fromDennis Technology Labs and rated Advanced+ in two tests by AV-Comparatives. However, "crazy many" false positives caused it to fail the file detection test from that same lab. Bitdefender and Kaspersky generally take top scores across the board.

In my own hands-on malware blocking test, Avast earned 9.0 of 10 possible point, better than most products tested using this same malware collection. Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Plus (2015)earned a perfect 10 in this test.

My malicious URL blocking test uses newly-discovered malware-hosting URLs, typically no more than four hours old. When I challenged Avast with about 100 of these, it blocked all access to 29 percent at the URL level and eliminated another 43 percent during download, for a total block rate of 72 percent. That's quite good, though McAfee Internet Security 2015 managed to block 85 percent.

Good, Not Great
Avast Internet Security 2015 offers almost all of the expected suite components (parental control is the exception), but their effectiveness varies. I like the innovative home router scan; this is an area that most vendors overlook. And Avast offers plenty of other bonus features. The problem is, top suites just do a better job overall.

Sub-Ratings:
Firewall:
Antivirus:
Performance:
Antispam:
Privacy:
Parental Control: n/a

Full Article
 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

Malicious URL Blocking
The big difference between F-Secure's suite and the standalone antivirus is the addition of browser protection. This component blocks access to malware-hosting URLs, and it did well in testing.

I started with a collection of newly-discovered malicious URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas, none of them more than four hours old. Some had already vanished, but I kept launching them one after another until I had results for 100 still-working URLs.

F-Secure blocked an impressive 73 percent of the malicious URLs. Only Trend Micro Internet Security 2015 at Trend Micro and avast! Internet Security 2014 at Avast have done better, with 80 percent and 79 percent, respectively.

F-Secure's standalone antivirus lacks browser protection, but it did manage to wipe out 34 percent of the malicious payloads during or immediately after download. That's just slightly better than the average blocking rate among current programs.

So-So Phishing Detection
The browser protection component also serves to steer users away from visiting phishing sites?fraudulent sites that attempt to steal login credentials. However, it wasn't nearly as effective as it was against malware-hosting URLs.

I started by collecting suspected phishing URLs from various sites. Then I launched each simultaneously on five test systems. Naturally one test system relied on F-Secure's protection. Another used Norton Internet Security (2014) at Amazon. The remaining three relied on the b... Read more

A:F-Secure Internet Security 2015 PCmag review

F-Secure is good, but it's quite expensive for an antivirus that offers fewer components, better use Emsisoft, Norton or Kaspersky.
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

Definitely a Contender
Bitdefender's antivirus technology routinely earns excellent scores from the independent testing labs, though it didn't do quite as well in my hands-on malware blocking test. It holds the top score in my phishing protection test, and its parental control system works across multiple Windows and Android devices. If its strengths match your needs, it can be a very good choice. However, it's not going to unseat Norton Internet Security (2014) as PCMag's security suite Editors' Choice.

Sub-Ratings:
Firewall:
Antivirus:
Performance:
Antispam:
Privacy:
Parental Control:

Full Article
 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

A Sweet Suite
Bitdefender Internet Security 2016 has everything you'd want in a suite, and more. Its antivirus gets stellar scores in our tests and lab tests, and its antispam beat out all competitors for accuracy. The firewall doesn't attempt fancy exploit blocking, but it's tough and hassle-free. Add features like ransomware protection, password management, and secure browsing, and you've got a suite with power to spare.

Along with Kaspersky Internet Security (2016), Bitdefender is a security suite Editors' Choice. Other products have earned the Editors' Choice rating for different variations on the security suite concept. In particular, McAfee LiveSafe 2015 and Symantec Norton Security are our Editors' Choice products for cross-platform multi-device security.

Sub-Ratings:
Note: These sub-ratings contribute to a product's overall star rating, as do other factors, including ease of use in real-world testing, bonus features, and overall integration of features.
Firewall:
Antivirus:
Performance:
Antispam:
Privacy:
Parental Control:

Full Article
 

A:Bitdefender Internet Security 2016 PCMag review

Few people realize that Bitdefender simply uses Windows Firewall and adds some policies to it. Windows Firewall does work rather well with outbound notifications...
 

Read other 4 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 97.2

An Excellent Choice
Kaspersky Internet Security (2016) is an all-around great security suite. The independent labs praise its antivirus protection to the skies, its firewall does the job without hassling the user, and its spam filter is more accurate than most. Even the parental control component boasts more features than most suites offer. Powerful remote management is icing on the cake. Kaspersky is a PCMag Editors' Choice security suite, sharing that honor with Bitdefender Internet Security 2015.

Firewall:
Antivirus:
Performance:
Antispam:
Privacy:
Parental Control:

Full Article
 

A:Kaspersky Internet Security (2016) PCMag review

Kaspersky already admits its lack of protection currently on Windows 10.
So, if this test is on Windows 10, then it is not reliable.
But if it is not on Windows 10, then KIS rocks definitely!
 

Read other 6 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 96

ThreatTrack Vipre Internet Security 2015
Pros - Good score in our malicious URL blocking test. Automatically applies security patches to browsers and important programs. Simple spam filter settings; accurate spam detection.
Cons - Fair to poor ratings from independent labs. Dismal antiphishing. Firewall failed some basic functions. Advanced firewall functions interfere with normal operation. Firewall easily disabled. More performance impact than most suites.
Bottom Line - The best part of ThreatTrack Vipre Internet Security 2015 is its spam filter. The antivirus and firewall components, more important overall, didn't perform as well in our testing.
Read more: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2471672,00.asp
 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 96

F-Secure Internet Security 2017 Review by PCMag 3,5/5 stars​
Pros
Excellent scores in our hands-on malware and malicious URL blocking tests. Firewall-assist component blocked many exploits. Banking protection prevents man-in-the-middle attacks.

Cons
Core functionality vulnerable to malicious attack. Child with administrator privileges can disable minimal parental control. Mediocre score in our antiphishing test. Good, not great, scores from independent testing labs.

Bottom Line
The antivirus components of F-Secure Internet Security scored high in our testing, aided by the suite-specific Browsing Protection features. However, the rest of its components don't make up a top-notch suite.

Full article: F-Secure Internet Security (2017)
 

A:F-Secure Internet Security 2017 Review by PCMag 3,5/5 stars

F-Secure is definitely not the best Internet Security Suite available for the price. It does ok but not the best in terms of detection rates & has very little extra features. I am not a big fan of the GUI or settings either but that's just me.
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 96

Shared Antivirus Features
The antivirus component in this suite is almost the same as the free Avira Antivirus 2015. The main difference is that the free edition relies on a browser plug-in for detecting malicious and fraudulent websites, whereas the Pro edition filters such sites below the browser level. That's an important distinction, because the free edition doesn't currently offer a plug-in for Internet Explorer.

Avira doesn't participate in testing with all the independent labs I follow, but those that do test it generally give it good ratings. The only significant exception is a poor score in a test by AV-Test Institute that specifically measures the ability of an antivirus product to completely clean up a detected malware infestation.

In my own hands-on malware blocking test, Avira didn't fare so well. With 76 percent detection and an overall score of 7.4 points (out of a possible 10), it's near the bottom.Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Plus (2015) earned the best score of products tested using my current malware collection; it managed a perfect 10.

As noted, the suite and free antivirus use different components to detect and block malware-hosting URLs, so I expected to see differing result in my malicious URL blocking test. Despite different styles of malicious URL detection and a completely different (but very new) set of test URLs, the two products earned almost identical scores, for a protection rate of 58 percent. That's... Read more

A:Avira Internet Security Suite 2015 PCmag review

Baloney. I used Avira to clean up an infected computer that was running Webroot. LSS, I don't have faith in this review.
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 90

Buy for Business, Not for Home
My rating of "good" for Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Premium 2.0 is an average, stuck in the middle between excellent malware cleanup and poor malware blocking. Businesses who buy it should consider teaming it with a more effective real-time solution such as Editors' Choice AVG AntiVirus FREE 2014. For personal use, stick with the free edition.

Full Article
 

A:Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Premium 2.0 review Pcmag.com

Agreed with the last statement, For personal use, stick with the free edition.
 

Read other 15 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 86.8

Comodo Internet Security Premium vs Zone Alarm Extreme Security
 

A:Comodo Internet Security Premium vs Zone Alarm Extreme Security

My vote goes to Zone Alarm but only for the fact that the average user uses Comodo with default settings.
With an advanced configuration (Comodo Defense +, Sandbox and HIPS), Comodo ensures an absolute protection level.
 

Read other 4 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 86

With respect to the Best Free Antivirus 2015 competition, I'm starting a thread series where users of the various products will be joining together to state the Pro's and Con's of each antivirus/internet security software and why they think it is a contender or not for the Best Free Antivirus.

The first post will be updated by me with what user's think is good and bad about the product, so an informed decision can be made for newcomers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE PRO'S
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CON'S
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related Threads:
Avast Free Antivirus - The Pro's and Con's
Qihoo 360 Total Security - The Pro's and Con's
Avira Free Antivirus - The Pro's and Con's
 

A:Comodo Internet Security Premium - Pro's and Con's

Cons
Has bugs so if you are unlucky and affected you will be sad. Bug fixing is slow and doesn't happen often and for sure not fast.
Needs a lot of effort to improve protection.

Pros
You can change configuration a lot to suit your needs.
Basic protection is decent.
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 84.4

Hands On With the Antivirus
The test results from the big independent labs are certainly useful, but I like to run my own tests, to get a hand-on feel for how each product works. The test starts when I open a folder containing my collection of malware samples. It's not uncommon for a security product to immediately wipe out most of the samples. Bitdefender Total Security 2015 and F-Secure Internet Security 2015 both wiped out more than 80 percent of the samples on sight.

Norton's approach is different, with much less reliance on simple signature-based detection. It wiped out 28 percent of the samples on sight, but blocked and quarantined most of the rest when I tried to launch them. With an overall detection rate of 89 percent and an overall score of 8.3, it's just a hair behind Bitdefender.

You'll notice in the chart that many products tested using my previous malware collection scored quite a bit higher. Since it was a different collection, scores aren't directly comparable. And I do give more weight to results from the independent labs.

Good Malicious URL Blocking
My malicious URL blocking test starts with a feed of newly discovered nasty URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas. I launch those that point directly to malicious executables, noting whether the security product blocked access to the URL, quashed the download, or simply did nothing. Despite being just a few hours old, many of the URLs are already no good. I keep at it until I have data for 100 ... Read more

A:Symantec Norton Security PCmag review

I do not like the bad detection of norton. Behavioral blocking and sonar is good but I like it when Antivirus detects even before executing.
 

Read other 20 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 84.4

Shared Antivirus
Antivirus protection in this suite is precisely the same as what you get with ESET NOD32 Antivirus 8, so I'll just summarize here. Read the antivirus review for full details.

ESET's technology gets high marks from almost all of the independent labs. It's one of just a handful that participated in all 12 of the last 12 tests by Virus Bulletin and received VB100 certification every time. It got the top rating in tests by AV-Comparatives and Dennis Technology Labs. Only AV-Test Institute gave it a so-so rating.

ESET didn't fare nearly as well in my own hands-on malware blocking test. I run this test mostly to get real-world experience of how each product handles malware attack, but I still like to see a good score. ESET scored 7.3 of 10 possible points, almost the lowest among products tested with my current sample set.

On the other hand, it did an extremely good job of blocking downloads from newly-discovered malicious URLs. It blocked 81 percent of the downloads, some by blocking all access to the URL and others by halting the download. With 85 percent blocking, McAfee Internet Security 2015 is the only product that's done better.

Other Shared Features
ESET's social media scan will check that you've got your Facebook and Twitter accounts configured for maximum privacy. Of course, if you want the public to see your tweets, maximum Twitter privacy may not be quite what you want. The scanner includes links to each service�... Read more

A:ESET Smart Security 8 PCmag review

Really ?

ESET is still the king
 

Read other 12 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 83.6

Very Good Malware Blocking
In addition to the company's own internal antivirus engine, Qihoo includes licensed engines from Bitdefender and Avira. However, you have to do a little work to make sure you're getting protection from those licensed engines. On the Virus Scan page you'll see icons for a total of five engines: 360 Cloud Scan Engine, System Repair Engine, QVMIII AI Engine, Bitdefender Engine, and Avira Engine. The last two are grayed by default, with an on/off switch that appears when you point to the icon. For testing, I turned both on.





Much Improved
Qihoo 360 Total Security Essential is a distinct improvement over its predecessor, 360 Internet Security. It gets great ratings from the independent testing labs, and it did well in all of our hands-on tests as well. On the flip side, I found that it erroneously marked one of my testing tools as malware. And while the behavior-based malware detection didn't pop up any notifications about actual malware samples, it flagged two PCMag utilities as suspicious.

Panda Free Antivirus 2015 remains our Editors' Choice for free antivirus. I'm particularly impressed with the availability of remote-control expert remediation for any malware that slips past the antivirus. I found Qihoo support to be not nearly as responsive. Even so, with a little tweaking Qihoo might well join Panda at the top. It's certainly worth a look.

Full Article
 

A:Qihoo 360 Total Security Essential - PCmag review

Webroot scores top lol. These tests are getting worse and worse.
 

Read other 2 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 83.6

Good, Not Great
Qihoo 360 Total Security Essential 8.6 packs in more security-related bonus features than any other free antivirus I can think of. Those features would be a lovely addition to an excellent free antivirus. The problem is that Qihoo's core antivirus protection doesn't quite measure up. There's not much to go on from the independent labs, but its scores in our own malware blocking and malicious URL blocking tests were just average. And somehow going from the previous edition to this one, its antiphishing score went from near the top to near the bottom.

If Qihoo's many extras fill you with delight, you can go ahead and use it. But if your aim is to get the best free antivirus protection you can, there are better choices. All five of the independent testing labs that I follow include both Avast Free Antivirus 2016 and AVG AntiVirus Free (2016) in their testing, giving them good marks overall. Panda Free Antivirus (2016) includes a collection of bonus features that almost rivals Qihoo's. All three are Editors' Choice winners for free antivirus.

Full Article
 

A:Qihoo 360 Total Security Essential 8.6 PCMag review

"But if your aim is to get the best free antivirus protection you can, there are better choices", I feel like who did this test has an agenda.
 

Read other 2 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 82.8

Pros
Includes password manager, software updater, and many other Avira tools. Excellent scores from antivirus labs. Very good score in malicious URL blocking test. Free.
Cons
Many components require payment for full functionality. Sluggish antivirus protection and scanning. Real-time protection missed some executable malware files.
Bottom Line
Avira Free Security Suite, introduced this year, packs a goodly collection of features beyond antivirus, but it doesn't come close to the power of a full-scale, paid security suite
 

A:Avira Free Security Suite (2017) - PCMag Review

Av-Comparatives: "Product of the year"
Av-test: 16.5/18
PCMag: 3/5
Me:
 

Read other 9 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 82.8

When I challenged Trend Micro to protect a virtual machine test system from my current collection of malware samples, it wiped out 66 percent of them on sight. It whacked quite a few more when I tried to launch them. Its detection rate of 89 percent and overall score of 8.9 put it in between F-Secure Internet Security 2015 and Bitdefender Total Security 2015.

I tested the product's ability to block malicious URLs using newly-discovered URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas. When initially tested, Trend Micro's 80 percent blocking rate for malicious URLs was a new high score. However, a few days later it was deposed by McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015, which blocked 85 percent. Both scores are impressive, given that the current average is 32 percent.Symantec Norton Security, tested simultaneously with Trend Micro, managed to block 51 percent.

A full scan of my standard test system took just 20 minutes. Because Trend Micro avoids re-scanning files already found to be safe, a repeat scan finished in less than a minute.

Trend Micro's impressive handling of malicious URLs also carried over to my test of its phishing protection ability. Its detection rate lagged just 4 percentage points behind that of Norton. Very few products come close to Norton's fraud detection rate.

Small Performance Hit
I wondered whether the additional installation of the password manager, safe browser, vault, and especially SafeSync would make this suite more of a resource eater than Trend Micro�... Read more

A:Trend Micro Maximum Security 2015 PCmag review

Hi Petrovic

Thanks for the info. How good is PCMag in-terms-of antivirus testing?

Tony
 

Read other 7 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 81.6

Hello,

Starting about two days ago my Comodo Internet Security Premium program has been detecting a malware labeled as "[email protected]" This internet security program consists of an Anti-Virus, Firewall, and Defense+ program all into one. Whenever it detects this Malware, this gives the following location:

c:\windows\assembly\tmp\U\80000032.$

Every time it detects it, I click on the "Clean" button in the dialogue, which is supposed to permanently remove that file from the system. But, it is never permanently removed. I believe this Malware may be hiding through a tmp folder. Even with view hidden folders enabled, I can never find that location in the assembly folder. I have submitted this file from quarantine for Comodo to analyze.

I have tried running the DDS as advised in the preparation guide. Unfortunately, Comodo marks it as "[email protected]" from the following location:

c:\Users\Vince\Downloads\dds.scr.part

This is, I assume, is the download file. Is this normal for a Anti-Virus to detect this program like that?

I would appreciate any help that I can get. My computer hasn't been rendered inoperable, nor has there been any real changes in performance, but I am thinking that as long as the Malware is on it, it will eventually find a way to damage my computer.

Thanks.

A:Comodo Internet Security Premium Anti-Virus Keeps Detecting "[email protected]"

Heuristic scans, which Heur is short for, have more false positives because they look for patterns.Please disconnect from the internet, disable Comodo, run DDS, save the logs, then re-enable Comodo, reconnect to the internet, and post the DDS logs in a reply to this topic.Please note that I am not a member of the Malware Removal Team and will not be assisting you in removing the infection. I'm simply helping you to post the information they need in order to assist you.If HelpBot replies to your topic, PLEASE follow Step One so it will report your topic to the team members.Orange Blossom

Read other 16 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 72.4

Issue 703 - google-security-research - Comodo: Comodo Internet Security installs and starts a VNC server by default - Google Security Research - Google Project Hosting
 

A:Comodo: Comodo Internet Security installs and starts a VNC server by default

LOL...

I knew there was a VNC associated with GeekBuddy, so I never installed it.

Even with the fix - don't install GeekBuddy - nor Chromodo, Dragon or Ice Dragon; a user doesn't need any of them.

A lot of the controversy associated with the above due to dodgy practices.

Other than that, COMODO Internet Security is decent security soft using Proactive Security at default settings.
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 71.2

I am using Comodo Internet security for the past 1 year, It is very simple to use, Moreover, when I had an issue with the security suite. But now I plan to upgrade to Comodo Internet Security, know what you guys think of Comodo Internet Security and what the difference.

A:What is difference between Comodo Antivirus and Comodo Internet Security?

Comodo Internet Security includes a firewall in addition to the usual antivirus.I do not use Comodo though (not a big fan of them in general) so I do not have any suggestion to add.

Read other 3 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68.8

read ........here






Quote:
Bottom Line

This edition of Avira Premium Security Suite corrects a couple big problems from the last edition, and its spam protection is quite good. Its malware protection is only OK, however, and the firewall, while effective, is unusually cryptic. You can do better.
Pros

Effective at keeping malware out of a clean system. Accurate spam filtering. Firewall blocks exploits and detects them by name.
Cons

Failed to block real-world attack by rogue anti-malware during testing. Spam filter appreciably slows e-mail download. Weak phishing protection. Rudimentary parental control and backup. Firewall popup queries unusually confusing.

A:Avira Premium Security Suite 10 review:PC Mag

Avira got a bad review as well in the current issue of Maximum PC.

Read other 3 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68.4

Could Be Good
There's no question that Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Plus (2015) is the tiniest suite around, with the least impact on system resources. And it offers impressive antivirus protection, demonstrated by top marks in my own tests and independent lab tests.

However, it lacks a number of features found in most of its competition. There's no firewall, just extra support for Windows firewall. If you need spam filtering or parental control, this isn't the suite for you. But if your needs coincide with the features it does have, it can be a great fit.

Sub-Ratings:
Note: These sub-ratings contribute to a product's overall star rating, as do other factors, including ease of use in real-world testing, bonus features, and overall integration of features.
Firewall: n/a
Antivirus:
Performance:
Antispam: n/a
Privacy:
Parental Control: n/a

Full Article
 

A:Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Plus 2015 - PCMag EDITOR RATING: EXCELLENT

Great antivirus for people who aren't too prone to malware infections.Despite the $39.99 price tag.I'm using it right now & so far, I've got no complaints about it.

Pros
-Extremely low memory usage (Cloud AV)
-Minuscule disk usage
-Good UI
-Full scan takes less than 10 minutes

Cons

-Cloud AV (Lower detection rates)
-Poor 0-day malware protection
-Requires a constant internet connection to function properly
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68.4

Hello everyone. Wanted to post this to find out whether you guys are liking Comodo v10. It's my personal impression that it's quite a measure better than the best of v8 with fewer bugs.

First a shout out for Comodo. I am using the FW version, and I would like to comment that I feel Comodo seems to me in the FW to have at least worked on getting the very most important elements of the program to function properly and dependably. At the same time, I don't sense that there is unpredictability hiding in CFW like I sensed with v8 and previously . This causes me to have confidence and not feel that the program is going to let me down somehow. Great job Comodo is my early impression.

Otherwise, I like the program. Can it be better? Yes, I think so, but now I am even more looking forward to v11 than I was looking forward to 10.

Please post comments. I am very interested in this topic. If I am right about dependability, I am curious if a dependable Comodo CIS/FW will push other security companies to double time plans they may have had for their product .
 

A:How Internet Security Your Experience with Comodo Comodo Internet Security/FW v10 so far?

"Disappearing rules" bug still not fixed ? Anyone thoroughly test it and verify that it has been fixed ?
 

Read other 8 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68.4

AVG Protection PRO


Pros
Installs AVG's security suite on unlimited PCs, antivirus on unlimited Android and Mac devices. AVG Zen tool monitors security of all your devices and allows remote fixing of problems. Less expensive than comparable products.
Cons No security suite for Mac, just antivirus. Comparable products are more feature-rich.
Bottom Line
AVG Protection PRO lets you install a security suite on unlimited PCs and antivirus on unlimited Mac and Android devices. It costs less than similar products, but it also offers fewer features.
Source: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2472440,00.asp
 

A:AVG Protection PRO PCmag review

I always liked AVG for it's simplicity. Very good for normal user.
 

Read other 3 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68

Hello Everyone !

Here we are happy to announce that the COMODO Internet Security/Antivirus/Firewall 8.2.0.4792 Hotfix for Windows10 1511 Support is released ! Main focus of the release is the Windows10 1511 Support improvements .

Thank you very much to you all for the precious feedbacks!

PS: We?re very close to release our CIS 9 Beta Public version ; please follow up closely, december is coming!

Updates are available !

Existing CIS 6.x, CIS 7x and CIS 8.x users will receive an automatic update offer CIS 8.2 Windows 10 1511 Hotfix Release update .

What's new in 8.2.0.4792?

Improved:

Windows 10 Support:

? Support improvements for Microsoft Windows 10 Version 1511.

Download Location

Comodo Internet Security
http://download.comodo.com/cis/download/installs/4020/standalone/cispremium_installer.exe
Size: 208M ( 217812544 )
MD5: 816bab2e2636fd73d2a31babaf55c632
SHA1: 7a028190bed60c4754888a15cf740f75402d0cb4

Comodo Antivirus
http://download.comodo.com/cis/download/installs/4020/standalone/cav_installer.exe
Size: 208M ( 217812536 )
MD5: ddac3913b73e67c3d7277205eccdd813
SHA1: f11da7984ebb751ac8d7c768765705df0d2872ab

Comodo Firewall
http://download.comodo.com/cis/download/installs/4020/standalone/cmd_fw_installer.exe
Size: 208M ( 217812536 )
MD5: 8af4d663d6086e8d7c4bfa90ffd4303c
SHA1: b4e80568f1db4c3d42137a40fad6dbec2f61df6d
 

A:Comodo Internet Security 8.2.0.4792 (Windows 10 Version1511 Hotfix) Internet Security released!

Comodo Internet Security Release Notes
20 November 2015
 

Read other 3 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68

I really want to secure my PC with anti-executable / application whitelisting technique.

Is there such a component in CIS?
 

A:Internet Security there an anti-executable / application whitelisting component in Comodo Internet Security?

Use proactive configuration and go to sandbox settings. By default proactive security will virtualize all unknows files.
If you want to block all files but whitelisted files.
See help: https://help.comodo.com/topic-72-1-623-7763-Configuring-Rules-for-Auto-Sandbox.html
Set "Block" for others.. So CIS only allows whitelisted ones, others will blocked.. Protection %100

You can dig into help files to learn more (like me) : https://help.comodo.com/topic-72-1-623-7587-Introduction-to-Comodo-Internet-Security.html
 

Read other 20 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68

Effective Antivirus
Webroot SecureAnywhere Antivirus (2015) is the tiniest antivirus around, and its installation and scanning are both super-fast. The mega-suite is slightly bigger, but it still takes about one tenth the disk space of the average suite. Read my review of the antivirus for full details. I'll simply summarize here.

None of the six independent labs I follow currently include Webroot in their regular testing, though Dennis Technology Labs will add Webroot in the first quarter of 2015. A private test by Dennis Labs earlier this year revealed that Webroot would have earned top-level AAA certification. Webroot was also one of just three product to pass in a test by MRG-Effitas.

Webroot's malware detection relies on a cloud service that analyzes program behaviors, not on antivirus signatures. On detecting an unknown process, Webroot starts journaling all its actions and watching for signs that it's malicious. If a process steps over the line, Webroot reverses all of its actions. Until a process gets the green light, irreversible actions like transmitting information to the Internet are suppressed.

I observed this feature in action; some of my malware samples initially seemed to get past the antivirus, but after a few minutes it started wiping them out. In the end it earned a perfect 10 points in my hands-on malware blocking test.

The suite also earned a very good score in my malicious URL blocking test. This test challenges each antivirus with 100... Read more

A:Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Complete 2015 - PCMag EDITOR RATING: EXCELLENT

Actually there is no 2015 range of Webroot products, only Neil J. Rubenking seems to think that. I don't think Webroot releases even work that way.
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 67.6

Simple Installation
When you purchase F-Secure SAFE, you get a link to download a just-for-you installer with your license key embedded. You create an F-Secure SAFE account and proceed to make your first installation. You can choose to download and install on the machine you're using, send an email link to another device, or send the link via SMS.

Installation is quick and simple. Any time you want to use another of your licenses, you simply log in to the F-Secure SAFE online console and repeat the process?either download locally or send a link via email or SMS.

PC Protection
Installed on a PC, F-Secure SAFE is precisely F-Secure Internet Security 2015, with the tiny addition of a tray menu item that links to the F-Secure SAFE online console. Read my review of the suite for full details.

Very briefly, this suite offers good detection of malware-hosting URLs, but isn't as good at detecting fraudulent (phishing) sites. It earned good scores in independent lab tests and in my own hands-on tests. However, its parental control system is limited, and it lacks features found in other suites, including one found in its own previous edition.

Android Protection
F-Secure SAFE for Android has a slick, spacious appearance. A row of icons across the bottom lets you flip between feature pages, or you can just swipe left or right. The antivirus component offers on-demand scanning, real-time protection, and scheduled scanning. You can also configure it to scan when the device ... Read more

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 67.6

Pros
Extremely fast scan. Removed many malware samples. Free.
Cons
No real-time protection. Missed older malware samples in testing. In testing, some files reported as quarantined were still present.
Bottom Line
Malwarebytes 3.0 Free aims to wipe out pernicious malware that gets past your regular antivirus, or prevents you from installing protection. But with no real-time protection it can't be your primary antivirus.
more in the link above

 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

Very Good Malware Blocking
Emsisoft also turned in a very good performance in my own hands-on malware blocking test. Unlike many of its peers, this product's on-access scanning doesn't trigger simply because Windows Explorer displayed information about the file. However, when I copied my malware collection to a new folder it quickly eliminated over 85 percent of those samples.

When I launched the surviving samples, a couple of them triggered behavior-based detection, meriting verification by the Emsisoft Anti-Malware Network. The network advised quarantining one but gave the other a clean bill of health.

Either on sight or at launch, Emsisoft detected 97 percent of my samples and scored 9.5 of 10 possible points. Few have done that well with my current sample set, though Webroot SecureAnywhere Antivirus managed a perfect 10 points.

My malicious URL blocking test starts with a feed of newly discovered malware-hosting URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas. I simply launch each URL and note whether the product forbids access to the URL altogether, wipes out the malicious payload, or sits idly by. Even these very new URLs are often dead by the time I try them, so I continue testing until I have 100 valid samples.

Emsisoft's Surf Protection kept the browser from connection to 55 percent of the sample URLs. Unlike many, it does not display a warning in the browser. Rather, it pops up a notification and leaves the browser to display an error message. That's not as pre... Read more

A:Emsisoft Anti-Malware 9.0 PCmag review

Overall a positive review from Rubenking...although, it appears this time he did not try to install EAM 9 on an already heavily infected system. That is what, according to him, sank EAM 7.

However, Emsi's position is that you cannot protect an already infected system so getting EAM onto such a system is not part of their product/threat model.

His review confirms what I see on my W8.1 system from day-to-day. EAM/EIS 9 is a very good product.
 

Read other 2 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

Still the Leader
Malwarebytes doesn't attempt ongoing, real-time protection. That's a job for your regular, full-scale antivirus. But if that full-scale antivirus won't install, or if malware defeats it, Malwarebytes is the go-to tool to solve the problem. Tech support agents from other antivirus companies rely on it; I've even heard agents pretend it belongs to their own company. Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 2.0 remains our Editors' Choice for free, cleanup-only antivirus.

Full Article
 

A:Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 2.0 review Pcmag.com

I agree, easy and effective.
 

Read other 2 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

Very Good Malware Blocking
Unlike Emsisoft Emergency Kit, Emsisoft Anti-Malware includes a collection of real-time protection components. Certainly you'll agree, while removing a malware infestation is good, preventing it from ever happening is even better.

Real-time scanning activates any time a file is accessed, but different products define "access" differently. For most, the minuscule access that occurs when Windows Explorer displays the filename is enough to trigger a scan. At the other end of the spectrum, GridinSoft Trojan Killer, Ashampoo Anti-Virus 2015, and a few others don't scan until just before the file executes.

I thought at first that Emsisoft fell into the latter category, which is a pain to test. Then I found that the act of moving a file to a new location was sufficient to trigger a scan. You can also tweak the File Guard settings in either direction, setting it to scan on any access for thoroughness, or to only scan on execution, for speed.

Emsisoft detected and eliminated 79 percent of the samples in my malware collection when I copied them to a new folder. It got most of the rest when I tried to launch them. In a couple of cases, it popped up an alert recommending that I quarantine a file based on its behavior; I complied.

One way or another, Emsisoft detected 93 percent of my samples and scored 9.0 of 10 possible points, the best score of any product tested with this same sample collection. Tested with my previous collection, F-S... Read more

A:Emsisoft Anti-Malware 10.0 PCMag review

Petrovic said:







View attachment 63201

Very Good Malware Blocking
Unlike Emsisoft Emergency Kit, Emsisoft Anti-Malware includes a collection of real-time protection components. Certainly you'll agree, while removing a malware infestation is good, preventing it from ever happening is even better.

Real-time scanning activates any time a file is accessed, but different products define "access" differently. For most, the minuscule access that occurs when Windows Explorer displays the filename is enough to trigger a scan. At the other end of the spectrum, GridinSoft Trojan Killer, Ashampoo Anti-Virus 2015, and a few others don't scan until just before the file executes.

I thought at first that Emsisoft fell into the latter category, which is a pain to test. Then I found that the act of moving a file to a new location was sufficient to trigger a scan. You can also tweak the File Guard settings in either direction, setting it to scan on any access for thoroughness, or to only scan on execution, for speed.

Emsisoft detected and eliminated 79 percent of the samples in my malware collection when I copied them to a new folder. It got most of the rest when I tried to launch them. In a couple of cases, it popped up an alert recommending that I quarantine a file based on its behavior; I complied.

One way or another, Emsisoft detected 93 percent of my samples and scored 9.0 of 10 possible points, the best score of any product teste... Read more

Read other 14 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015


Pros - Good scores in independent lab tests and our hands-on tests. New high score in malicious URL blocking. Website rating, with details. Numerous bonus features.
Cons - Phishing detection rate less than Chrome or Firefox alone. Firewall does not stealth ports in all cases. Most of the product's 12 services could be disabled by malware.
Bottom Line - McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015 earns a new top score in our malicious URL blocking test, and it gets good ratings from the independent labs. It comes with a raft of useful bonus tools, though the bonus firewall seemed a bit wobbly in our testing.
Read more: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2469309,00.asp
 

A:McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015 PCmag review

i have red the review a few hours ago and the most disturbing thing for me is that mcafee can't protect it's self from malware.also the firewall isn't good but you can always use windows built in firewall.if they improve those components i believe more people will trust them because some components are very good such as web blocking(site adviser)
 

Read other 3 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

Excellent Malicious URL Blocking
I've been running my malicious URL blocking test since last November. I start with a feed of very new malicious URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas. I filter out those that don't point directly to malicious executables and then try launching each URL. Even though they're typically less than four hours old, many are already MIA. For the URLs that still work, I note whether the antivirus blocks access to the site entirely, blocks the malicious download, or does nothing.

avast! Free Antivirus 2014 was one of the first products to undergo this test, and for many, many months its blocking rate of 79 percent remained the top score. In the last couple weeks, that score has been thrashed repeatedly. Trend Micro Antivirus+ 2015 blocked 80 percent, a new high score. But just days later, McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015 leapt into first place with 85 percent.

ESET blocked access to 32 percent of the URLs and prevented malware download for another 49 percent. Its total blocking percentage of 81 percent doesn't beat the record, but it's respectably in second place.

Average System Scan
ESET defaults to what it calls Smart Scan for malware. I had to dig deep to find a way to launch an in-depth scan. I thought the scan was going to be quick, because the progress bar filled almost to the end in just a few minutes. However, it sat there at almost-done for quite some time. In the end, it took 26 minutes, precisely the current average.

It did repo... Read more

A:ESET NOD32 Antivirus 8 PCmag review

Who believes this PCmag review fellows? According to them AVG is the best;their reviews are far away from reality.Our friend @Manzai has better review with proof..............
 

Read other 11 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

Hands-On Testing
In addition to checking scores with the major testing labs, I put each antivirus through hands-on testing. I start by opening a folder containing a collection of malware samples. The simple access that occurs when Windows Explorer gets file information for display was enough to trigger AVG's real-time protection. It detected 72 percent of the samples on sight and offered to remove them.

Next, I launched the samples that weren't wiped out immediately. Overall, AVG detected 79 percent of these samples and earned 7.8 of 10 possible points. That's definitely on the low side, but I give significantly more weight to the independent lab tests. My own malware-blocking test serves mostly to give me hands-on experience with each product's way of handling real-time protection.

One feature of AVG's Web TuneUp browser extension is Site Safety, which promises to warn you before you visit a "risky or dangerous website." Apparently Site Safety doesn't apply to URLs that point directly to malware programs; Site Safety didn't kick in at all during my malicious URL blocking test. However, of the 100-odd newly reported malicious URLs I tried, the real-time protection component wiped out 54 percent. That's better than the current average of 41 percent.

McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015 holds the top score in this test, with 85 percent of the URLs blocked. Avast managed a respectable 72 percent.

Unusual Phishing Protection
Phishing we... Read more

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

Malicious URL Blocking
Thanks to a real-time feed supplied by MRG-Effitas, I have access to a continually updated list of malicious URLs. I use these to check how each antivirus product handles extremely new threats. Does it block access to the URL, wipe out the downloaded malware, or just sit there doing nothing?

Bitdefender completely blocked access to 18 percent of the live malicious URLs I used for testing, but didn't wipe out any of the downloads that got through. It might well have caught those on launch, but that's not what this test measures. I've run two dozen products through this test so far, each with URLs no more than four hours old. The average protection rate is 33 percent, almost twice what Bitdefender managed. I'll be interested to see how Norton AntiVirus (2014) and Webroot SecureAnywhere Antivirus (2014) do when it's their turn for this test.

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2015 Malware Blocking Chart

Good Malware Blocking
I rely more and more on the independent labs for in-depth antivirus testing, but I always need to do my own hands-on testing, to get a feel for the product's protection. To start, I opened a folder containing my just-gathered new set of malware samples. Bitdefender quickly and quietly wiped out 83 percent of those samples.

Next I launched the remaining samples and noted the antivirus's reaction. It completely missed several, ending up with an overall detection rate of 86 percent and an overall score of 8.... Read more

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

During a full antivirus scan, G Data reports both time elapsed and time remaining. At one point, the sum of those two times exceeded 80 minutes. However, the scan actually completed in 48 minutes. That's a good bit longer than the current average of 28 minutes to scan a clean system. Some antivirus products speed subsequent scans by skipping known safe files. Comodo Antivirus 8, for example, re-scanned my test system in less than two minutes. Not G Data; a repeat scan took just as long.

Good Malware Blocking
When I exposed G Data to a folder containing my current collection of malware samples, it wiped out most of them right away, and eliminated a few more when I tried to launch them. One way or another, G Data detected 93 percent of the samples and scored 9.3 of 10 possible points. Few products have scored better in this test, though Webroot SecureAnywhere Antivirus (2015) did manage a perfect 10.

As always, I also checked the product's reaction to a folder containing modified versions of the same samples. Each of the modified samples has a different filename and file size from the original, and a few non-executable bytes are also different. G Data didn't immediately recognize 22 percent of the samples whose originals were wiped out on sight. Interestingly, it did recognize several modified files whose originals weren't caught until I tried to launch them. Clearly there are multiple levels of protection going on here.

G Data blocked access to 45 percen... Read more

A:G Data Antivirus 2015 PCmag review

thanks for the share petrovic !!
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

Pros
Excellent scores from independent labs. Scores from very good to superb in our hands-on tests. Effective ransomware protection. Many bonus features including password manager, secure browser, and file shredder.
Cons
Full antivirus scan took longer in testing than most competitors.
Bottom Line
Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2017 combines top-scoring antivirus protection with so many bonus features it would almost qualify as a security suite.

...more in the link above
 

A:PcMag Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2017 Review

Every years it is the same story "BD is top because blablabla... "
 

Read other 4 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.4

Moderator Edit: Formatting / Spelling and Grammar updated to make Thread presentable.

Are we all ready to see the Brand New Comodo Internet Security 10 with Secure Shopping?

We?re so very excited to share with you the Beta version of our brand new release ; our new born CIS V10.0.0.6071 Beta ! We have worked on a number of new features and improvements according to your feedback and finally we are ready to share with you our brand new version !

Seamless Protection Shield: We Default Deny Unknowns

As a core element of Comodo Internet Security seamless protection, Default Deny Platform is now even more improved and easy to use.

In order to increase the user experience as well as providing the full protection, one of the most important points is also giving the right verdict to the files. CIS stores ratings of a file from a user, other sources, and cloud as separate data fields with their own time-stamp. CIS combines all those fields to the final rating on the fly. This allows understanding why we trust the file and when each component of this decision had been got.

CPU Enforced OS Virtualization

Run any file virtually; no matter if it is a harmful file or not. It can not harm your your PC.

Virtual Desktop: Leave your computer to your Children or Novice Users without a doubt!
Spoiler: Read more
Virtual Desktop creates a safe play zone for children as well as yourself. Whenever they download games or run an application, they also might change the wallpaper, default f... Read more

A:Comodo Internet Security V10.0.0.6071 Beta Internet Security Released

When they will release their final version?
 

Read other 64 answers