Over 1 million tech questions and answers.

PcMag Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2017 Review

Q: PcMag Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2017 Review

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

RELEVANCY SCORE 200
Preferred Solution: PcMag Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2017 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.)

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 129.6

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
 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 122.4

New version of ZoneAlarm Free Antivirus+ was tested by pcmag.com.

Results: Editor rating: excellent
Pros:
Tough, effective two-way firewall. Antivirus protection licensed from Kaspersky. Free. Several useful bonus features.

Cons
Hardly any results from independent testing labs. Doesn't include every feature of Kaspersky antivirus. No phishing protection. Behavioral detection flagged both good and bad programs.

Bottom Line
ZoneAlarm Free Antivirus+ combines a top-notch firewall with antivirus protection licensed from award-winning Kaspersky. This free program can be a good choice if you don't want a full-scale security suite.


For more go to Check Point ZoneAlarm Free Firewall 2017
 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 118

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 101.6

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 96.4

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 96.4

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 88

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 87.2

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 87.2

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 87.2

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 87.2

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 86.4

Hands-On Testing
To get a feel for the program's protection, I challenged it with my collection of malware samples. Its real-time protection kicked in the moment I opened the sample folder, quickly eliminating 66 percent of the samples. Note, though, that F-Secure Anti-Virus 2015 wiped out 83 percent of those same samples on sight.

Next, I launched the samples that survived the initial massacre. In several cases it reported the sample or one of its components as suspicious, in some cases with the warning "Please do not open this file unless you trust its source." That seems a bit weak to me?a user could accidentally choose to run malware detected in this way. I made sure to avoid that error.

With 89 percent detection and 8.7 points overall, Trend Micro is just behind F-Secure among products tested with this same malware collection. Note, though, that I give greater weight to ratings from the independent labs than to my simple hands-on test.

Trend Micro's Smart Protection Network gathers telemetry from millions of computers. Among other things, it identifies malware-hosting websites, and instructs your local antivirus to prevent access to those sites. Based on my testing, it really works. The test starts with a feed of very new malicious URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas. I simply launch each URL and note whether the product blocks URL access, eliminates the download, or does nothing.

Trend Micro detected 80 percent of the samples, almost all of them at th... Read more

A:Trend Micro Antivirus+ 2015 PCmag review

 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 86.4

Effective Malware Blocking
Panda scored very well in my hands-on malware blocking test. When I opened a folder containing my current malware sample collection, it didn't do anything immediately. That's because Panda waits for a significant event like file creation or modification; it doesn't scan just because a process accessed the file. When I copies the collection to another folder, Panda got to work, quickly wiping out 86 percent of the samples.

It also caught some of the remaining samples when I launched them. Overall, it detected 89 percent of the samples and earned 8.8 points, the same as Kaspersky. Among products tested with this same collection, Trend Micro has the best scores, with 93 percent detection and 9.1 points.

Results from tests with my previous malware collection aren't directly comparable, of course, but you have to appreciate what Webroot SecureAnywhere Antivirus (2015) did with that bunch. It detected 100 percent of the samples and earned a perfect 10 points.

My malicious URL blocking test doesn't rely on a pre-set collection of samples. Rather, I take the very newest list of malicious URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas and attempt to download real-world malware samples. The antivirus gets credit for blocking access to the URL or for wiping out the file during or immediately after the download. I keep at this test until I have results for 100 very new malicious URLs.

As I proceeded with the test, Panda's stats stayed remarkably... Read more

A:Panda Free Antivirus (2016) PCMag review

I should not provide any questions for Panda cause they have already identical two flip side of a story in the test.

One is independent organization test and user based test.
 

Read other 9 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 86.4

Real-time Protection
For some antivirus products, the minimal file access that occurs when Windows Explorer displays the filename is sufficient to trigger real-time protection. Avast waits until just before a program executes to run a real-time scan. In testing, it wiped out almost 80 percent of my malware samples immediately on launch.

Avast detected most of the remaining samples at some point as they attempted to install and run. In a couple of cases, it activated a powerful analysis tool called DeepScan. Avast also invoked DeepScan to make sure that a couple of my malware-testing programs weren't themselves malicious.

In one case, fortunately the last sample I tested, Avast requested a boot time scan for complete cleanup. That scan took almost an hour, and required my attention every so often to make decisions about the disposition of particular malware traces. You can launch a boot time scan at will, if you suspect the regular scan has missed something.

One way or another, Avast detected 93 percent of my samples, the same asF-Secure Anti-Virus 2015. However, because Avast allowed installation of some executable malware traces, its final score came out to 9.0 points, while F-Secure managed 9.3. The absolute winner among products tested with this sample set is Webroot SecureAnywhere Antivirus (2015), which earned 10 of 10 possible points.

Avast's previous edition was among the first products exposed to my malicious URL blocking test. For many, many months, its... Read more

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 86.4

So-so Malware Blocking
Last year Avira earned an impressive score in my hands-on malware blocking test, with 97 percent detection and 9.7 of 10 possible points. Not this year.

When I opened a folder containing my current collection of malware samples, Avira wiped out 72 percent immediately. That's good, but Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2015 at BitDefender, F-Secure Anti-Virus 2015, and ThreatTrack Vipre Antivirus 2015 all managed 83 percent.

I also tested Avira using hand-modified versions of the same sample set. For each file, I changed the name, appended nulls to change the file size, and tweaked some non-executable characters. Avira missed three of the tweaked files. However, it detected another two tweaked files whose originals it missed. I can't explain that.

After launching all of the remaining samples, I evaluated how well Avira handled them. Overall, it detected 76 percent of the malware samples and scored 7.4 points, quite a drop from last year.

Good Malicious URL Blocking
In the real world, you're more likely to encounter a brand-new malware attack via a malicious or compromised website, so I test for that ability as well. I start with a feed of newly-discovered malicious URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas. After filtering out those that don't point directly to malicious executables, I try loading each one in a browser to see what (if anything) the antivirus will do.

Quite a few of the URLs were already defunct, despite being no more than four hours... Read more

A:Avira Free Antivirus 2015 PCmag review

Avira need to put some more effort because the competition is pretty high
 

Read other 7 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 86.4

Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus (2015)


Pros
Extremely small and light on resources. Fast install, super-fast scan. Top marks in two independent lab tests. Perfect score in hands-on malware blocking test. Very good malicious URL blocking. Can control protected computers from Web console. Good phishing protection.
Cons Requires Internet connectivity for full protection.

Bottom Line
Two independent testing labs have given Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus (2015) their top ratings, and it earned a perfect score in our hands-on malware blocking test. Add the fact that it's the smallest antivirus around and you've got a definite Editors' Choice.
Read more: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2470312,00.asp
 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 86.4

Very Good Malware Blocking
As with SuperAntiSpyware Professional 6.0, Panda's on-access scanning doesn't spring into action until you attempt to execute a file. Unlike SuperAntiSpyware, Panda did a good job blocking malware at launch. It deleted three quarters of the samples before they could execute.

A few of the samples did manage to launch; Panda caught some of those later in the process. Its detection rate of 86 percent is tied with Bitdefender for the best detection rate among products tested with my current sample set. Panda's overall score of 8.0 can't beat Bitdefender's 8.3 points, but it's better than the rest of the current group, includingKaspersky Anti-Virus (2015)'s 7.9 points.

Panda Free Antivirus 2015 Malware Blocking Chart

You'll note in the chart that AVG AntiVirus FREE 2014 and various others tested with my previous malware collection made a significantly better showing. That was a different set of samples, though, and the independent testing labs give very good scores to Panda, Kaspersky, and Bitdefender.

As part of my testing, I installed about 20 PCMag utilities. Panda's behavior-based malware detection identified a temporary file created by one of them as malicious, though when I looked at the detailed log it merely said "suspicious." I submitted the file to VirusTotal, to be sure it wasn't actually infected. All of the 53 antivirus engines hosted on VirusTotal gave it a clean bill of health... Read more

A:Panda Free Antivirus 2015 PCmag review

Does it differ from Panda Cloud Free?( I mean ,Are they two seperate products or this one is the new follower?)
 

Read other 2 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 84

First, thank you for your reading.
I want to ask you about the better setting for building secure PC on Windows 10 as a consumer.

I am using Bitdefender Total Security 2017 as the main anti-malware software and firewall software on my PC. It looks good.

But at sometimes, Bitdefender is heavy a little, especially when updating signatures.
And booting time of my PC is long. Updating time at start up Windows is also long. I think it.

So I seaching another security softwares for my PC, and I find some softwares which I guess that it is good for using PC. The soft is Avast Free 2016, and Microsoft EMET or Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit Free Edition.

~Q.1~
Which is better, Avast Free 2016 or Bitdefender Security 2017. I will use EMET or MBAE for covering protection of vulnerability when I use Avast Free.

~Q.2~
What is Bitdefender and Avast Free regarded as security software for Windows 10 Consumers?
Which software do many people regard as a good solution?
I heard that Bitdefender is getting very high level score in many tests, but it is heavy for many PC.
And I aloso heard that Latest Avast Free gives security enough for many consumers, but sometimes do false detection, and it may be serious for OS at sometimes.
Please teach me about above things. I guess my English is not well, but I will read all replies from everyone. If I will be late replyng you. excuse me.

Thank you!
 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 69.6

Spoiler: Changelog
This version fixes the following issues:
? Fixed a rare Chrome crash when accessed from the upgrade page
? Fixed Profile not scrolling to the bottom
? Fixed a crash when downgrading the product
? Fixed a crash caused by Device Management
? Fixed a issue where the Anti-Spam events would not show up in the Notifications tab
? Fixed a rare crash where the installer would crash at system check
? Fixed a issue where the Drives and Devices would be greyed-out on a limited account
? Fixed a issue where the Vulnerability Scan would show notifications when there are no vulnerabilities
? Bitdefender Agent Schedule has been set back to 1 min
? Fixed a graphical issue in Scan Reports
? Fixed a issue where the Firewall would block the printer
? Fixed a issue where the WMI Provider Host would eat unnecessary CPU
? Fixed a issue where the Remember This Website on SafePay would have no effect
? Fixed a crash on systems with their language set to Greek
? Fixed a rare crash when the system comes out of sleep
? Fixed a issue where the Scan USB Devices function would automatically immunize them as well
? Fixed a issue where the Paranoid Mode will remain enabled even after disabling the Firewall or the AV
? Fixed a issue where the Agent login page would be blank due to IE security settings
? Added Whitelist option under Web Protection
? Fixed a crash caused by IE
? Fixed a rare crash caused by the Update engine
? Fixed a issue where P... Read more

A:Bitdefender 2017 21.0.18.967

The best AV in the world for 5 years nowand the best interface(i think).
Bitdefender 2016-17 have saved me from 4 ransomeware attack the last 3 weeks.
 

Read other 5 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 69.6

Read more: http://pcmag.com/security-devices-p...er-box-wants-to-help-you-avoid-phishing-scams

The new Box V2 includes all of these features, plus an enhanced assessment tool that scans for weak or default passwords and other vulnerabilities hackers could exploit.

New Features
Leverages heuristic data gathered by Bitdefender about what safe and normal network traffic looks like, should it detect anything untoward?exploits, brute-force attacks, port scanning?the Box blocks access.

Monitor where you enter personal information?such as address, Social Security number, etc.?and prevent you from accidentally submitting that data on fraudulent or insecure websites.

Improved Hardware
Dual-core ARM Cortex A9 processor
1GB of DDR3 memory
4GB of eMMC/NAND storage
Supports Dual Concurrent 2.4GHz and 5GHz
802.11n MIMO 2x2 + 802.11ac MIMO 33 AC1300
Two 10/100/1000 BaseT Ethernet ports

The beefier hardware is designed to run more activities locally, from the Box V.2 itself.

Price and Licensing
The Box Version 2 is expected to retail in the sub-$200 range, and will go on sale later this year with pre-orders beginning in summer 2017. Bitdefender says it will likely keep both devices on the market to provide different price points. Either device comes with a free year of security coverage from Bitdefender, which will cost consumers $99 a year afterwards.

Both BOX devices are now part of Bitdefender Total Security 34.94 at BitDefender UK and provide consumers with unlimited lic... Read more

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68.8

Source: Anti-virus4U.com Blog: Bitdefender 2017 Available for Download!
Exclusive News by ANTI-VIRUS4U.COM
The New Bitdefender 2017 Available for Download!
Bitdefender has released its 2017 product (Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2017, Bitdefender Internet Security 2017, Bitdefender Total Security Multi-Device 2017, Bitdefender Family Pack 2017 and Bitdefender Mobile Security 2017).

What's new in Bitdefender 2017?

Improved product Usability (windows)

The new user interface greatly improves product usability. It offers 2-click access to most of the product modules and up-to-date information about threats being blocked on the device.
The front-end framework has been completely redone for improved responsiveness and performance.
Features like Safepay include significant improvements that create a more natural browser-like interaction with the user.

PROTECTION

Complete Data - Protection Absolute power in the most efficient antivirus available today. Bitdefender works against all threats, from viruses, worms and Trojans, to ransomware, zero-day exploits, rootkits and spyware. Your data and your privacy are in good hands.
Active Threat Control - We use an innovative technique called behavioral detection to closely monitor your active apps. When Bitdefender detects anything suspicious, it takes instant action.
Ransomware Protection for YOUR important files - Keep your work documents, vacation pictures and videos safe from any malware that could steal, delete or encrypt y... Read more

A:Bitdefender 2017 final is here

Wow, I was a long time Bitdefender user and this looks tempting.
I am always impressed each year with BD's improvements this year
looks to be no exception. I would almost go back to a sig based AV
for this one
Awesome share Dima007
 

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68.8

Bitdefender 2017 Beta is ready for feedback. Starting July 28th you can use your great skills and join the bug hunt.You’ll have the opportunity to test Bitdefender's new security products for Windows, Mac OS, and Android, as well as our improved security hub, Bitdefender Central.We’ve prepared really cool prizes for the best of you and an awesome surprise!
 
 
Alex I. - Bitdefender Support

A:Bitdefender 2017 Beta

How many beta programs are being offered?The below topic was posted two days ago by another person we believed to be associated with Bitdefender as well since they are asking for feedback.BitDefender Free Antivirus 2016 BETAIf you too are an Authorized Company Representative for Bitdefender (Author, Developer, Researcher, Support Engineer), please read the information I have just sent via PM to your inbox.

Read other 1 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68.8

Bitdefender 2017 Beta is ready for feedback. Starting July28th you can use your great skills and join the bug hunt.

You?ll have the opportunity to test Bitdefender's new security products for Windows, Mac OS, and Android, as well as our improved security hub, Bitdefender Central.

We?ve prepared really cool prizes for the best of you and an awesome surprise!

A:Bitdefender 2017 Beta

I'm more interested on their free antivirus beta version than this. Don't need PC optimization, junk cleaner or their firewall feature as Windows firewall and CCleaner is already good.

Read other 2 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 68.8

Bitdefender Beta 2017 is here, and we need you. Become a Beta tester, and give us the feedback that will make a difference.

You'll help us fight the bad bugs and make the world safer.

Plus, we've prepared tons of cool prizes that you are automatically entered to win when you join our Beta program.

So come be a superhero and help us keep devices everywhere free of malware. Become a Beta tester now.

Bitdefender Beta 2017
 

A:Bitdefender Beta 2017 is here

Thanks for posting, im gonna try it out!
 

Read other 4 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

Good morning. I remember that, to use the old version of bitdefender free after 30 days, you had to make a bitdefender account. Do you still have to make an account even with the new version or that duty has been removed?
 

A:Bitdefender free 2017 account

yes, bitdefender account is necessary. I think the installer will not let you install until you sign in.

Bitdefender Antivirus Free + Offline installation
 

Read other 0 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 67.6

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 67.6

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 67.6

Hello,

On my PC I have installed Bitdefender Internet Security 2017 plus SpyShelter Firewall. Besides of very rare BSOD, I have another strange problems: I can't go to certain website in particular. The other website are opened normally, without issues. I noticed that just as the computer starts with the processes of BD and SpyShelter, and for the first 10/15 minutes, I didn't have problems, but passed this amount of time, here are the problems. I get specifically this two type of error: "Unable to load the page" and "Unable to reach the page". The problems happen on all the browsers installed on the PC. My PC has Windows 10 64-bit, I am on the latest build of AU (14393.479). In addition to this, sometimes my browser for open a webpage, it requires a lot of time, and I have to reboot the PC to get Internet working again. At this point, I don?t understand what is the cause to these problem. Can you help me?
Thanks
 

A:Bitdefender IS 2017 with SpyShelter Firewall installed

It could be a conflict between two, you already have bit is, with firewall, you dont need more firewall programs like spyshelter firewall, try to delete spyshelter to see if there is any better.
 

Read other 2 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 67.6

http://www.Bitdefender.com/beta2017/images/beta2017-prize.png

Bitdefender Beta 2017 is here, and we need you. Become a Beta tester, and give us the feedback that will make a difference.

You'll help us fight the bad bugs and make the world safer.

Plus, we've prepared tons of cool prizes that you are automatically entered to win when you join our Beta program.

So come be a superhero and help us keep devices everywhere free of malware. Become a Beta tester now.

Bitdefender Beta 2017
 

A:Bitdefender Beta 2017 Internet Security here

Thanks for posting, im gonna try it out!
 

Read other 66 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 67.6

hello .. currently I'm running BD TS 2017 on this laptop .. however I was wondering if I switched to Windows defender (with registry PUA tweaked) + Voodooshield + Zemana AntiLogger (got a lifetime from a giveaway here) would protect me sufficiently .
I thought about this bcoz the combo is really light.
thanks in advance
 

Read other answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 67.6

Source: Anti-virus4U.com Blog: Bitdefender 2017 Available for Download!
Exclusive News by ANTI-VIRUS4U.COM
The New Bitdefender 2017 Available for Download!
Bitdefender has released its 2017 product (Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2017, Bitdefender Internet Security 2017, Bitdefender Total Security Multi-Device 2017, Bitdefender Family Pack 2017 and Bitdefender Mobile Security 2017).

What's new in Bitdefender 2017?

Improved product Usability (windows)

The new user interface greatly improves product usability. It offers 2-click access to most of the product modules and up-to-date information about threats being blocked on the device.
The front-end framework has been completely redone for improved responsiveness and performance.
Features like Safepay include significant improvements that create a more natural browser-like interaction with the user.

PROTECTION

Complete Data - Protection Absolute power in the most efficient antivirus available today. Bitdefender works against all threats, from viruses, worms and Trojans, to ransomware, zero-day exploits, rootkits and spyware. Your data and your privacy are in good hands.
Active Threat Control - We use an innovative technique called behavioral detection to closely monitor your active apps. When Bitdefender detects anything suspicious, it takes instant action.
Ransomware Protection for YOUR important files - Keep your work documents, vacation pictures and videos safe from any malware that could steal, delete or encrypt yo... Read more

A:Bitdefender 2017 final Internet Security here

Wow, I was a long time Bitdefender user and this looks tempting.
I am always impressed each year with BD's improvements this year
looks to be no exception. I would almost go back to a sig based AV
for this one
Awesome share Dima007
 

Read other 86 answers
RELEVANCY SCORE 66.8

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 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

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 66.4

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 66.4

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 66.4

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 66.4

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 66.4

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 66.4

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