Avast WEBforum
Consumer Products => Avast Free Antivirus / Premium Security (legacy Pro Antivirus, Internet Security, Premier) => Topic started by: Dreamy on July 16, 2010, 03:53:09 PM
-
First of all hello again. :)
Okay soon my License for Online Armor firewall will expire.
Now i have a second license for AIS Paid.
So my desktop PC will be reformated and a new installation of Win XP Pro will be installed.
(I am going to attempt doing this myself)
Now for the advice.
A: Should i install Win XP Pro then do all the MicroSoft security updates manually first then install AIS Paid. ?
Or
B: Should i install Win XP Pro and upon completion of installation install AIS then update AIS then after all of that is done install all the MicroSoft Security Updates?
The Reason that i am asking is because i am unsure if AIS will interfere with the MicroSoft security updates if i put in AIS Paid first.
This will be what i will want on my desktop home PC for security.
AIS PAID
MBAM (Really wanting to buy this) its great.
SuperAntiSpyware (The free one)
SpywareBlaster
Will the 4 programs above interfere with each other ?
______________________________________________________________
My notebook computer was already setup by our tech and has AIS PAID, MBAM free (which i am considering buying) & SpyWareBlaster. And it works great.
I would get our tech to do my desktop but i would rather not have him coming to my place it's a bit awkward. So i am asking you guru's what your advice would be on the bolded bit above.
Both my Pc's have 2 gigs Ram & XP Pro SP3
Thank You :)
And Sorry for being a pest. :)
-
1. The Reason that i am asking is because i am unsure if AIS will interfere with the MicroSoft security updates if i put in AIS Paid first.
AIS PAID
MBAM (Really wanting to buy this) its great.
SuperAntiSpyware (The free one)
SpywareBlaster
2. Will the 4 programs above interfere with each other ?
1. AIS does not interfere with MS updates..!
2. Usually not...! (Still I see no reason for SpywareBlaster, but that's just my personal opinion..)
But why would you reformat your machine at all...??
asyn
-
I do use SpywareBlaster on my systems
Secure Your Browser
SpywareBlaster provides protection for your favorite web browser(s):
Internet Explorer
Mozilla Firefox
Netscape
Seamonkey
Flock
K-Meleon
and browsers that use the IE engine, including:
AOL web browser
Avant Browser
Slim Browser
Maxthon (formerly MyIE2)
Crazy Browser
GreenBrowser
Guarding the Door
Many other programs use Internet Explorer as a default browser, or use the Internet Explorer engine to display their interface or content. So even if your browser is not listed above (e.g. Opera), SpywareBlaster will protect you in many other cases.
-
AIS PAID
MBAM (Really wanting to buy this) its great.
SuperAntiSpyware (The free one)
SpywareBlaster
2. Will the 4 programs above interfere with each other ?
1. AIS does not interfere with MS updates..!
2. Usually not...! (Still I see no reason for SpywareBlaster, but that's just my personal opinion..)
But why would you reformat your machine at all...??
asyn
Whoops :-[ my fault for not being concise.
The shop will be putting in a bigger hard disk then i have to do the format and everything else.
-
I do use SpywareBlaster on my systemsSecure Your Browser
Yes i really like it and it never seems to interfere with anything. :)
I like having Firefox installed beside Internet Explorer.
I also deleted Spybot S&D off of my desktop PC tonight and it runs much much faster. (Thank you Asyn) :)
-
Whoops :-[ my fault for not being concise.
The shop will be putting in a bigger hard disk then i have to do the format and everything else.
No problem..! ;)
asyn
-
I also deleted Spybot S&D off of my desktop PC tonight and it runs much much faster. (Thank you Asyn) :)
You're welcome..!
I guess I adviced you to do so in another thread...!? ;D
asyn
-
You're welcome..!
I guess I adviced you to do so in another thread...!? ;D
asyn
That is correct and i have not looked back. :) I put SupAntiSpyWare in it's place alongside MBAM.
And for SpyWare Blaster i guess it makes me feel safer, and it never seemed to interfere ever with anything so i am with YoKenny on that one. :)
But i can not believe how much better my Desktop PC is now that i deleted Spybot S&D off it tonight.
-
Okay Thank you. :)
So i will install Win XP Pro then install and update AIS then do all the MicroSoft security updates.
Thank you both Asyn & YoKenny :) :)
-
... Okay soon my License for Online Armor firewall will expire.
IMHO the OA firewall (even the free version) is overall a much better firewall (i.e.,HIPS, Program Control, etc.) than the current AIS firewall.
I did a custom install of AIS--did not install the firewall and the SPAM portions of AIS.
-
... Okay soon my License for Online Armor firewall will expire.
IMHO the OA firewall (even the free version) is overall a much better firewall (i.e.,HIPS, Program Control, etc.) than the current AIS firewall.
I did a custom install of AIS--did not install the firewall and the SPAM portions of AIS.
I would suggest avast! Silent Firewall. Its very silent and is for all (novice,pro,expert)
Also its dont interfert with any gamings or something else.
-
... Okay soon my License for Online Armor firewall will expire.
IMHO the OA firewall (even the free version) is overall a much better firewall (i.e.,HIPS, Program Control, etc.) than the current AIS firewall.
I did a custom install of AIS--did not install the firewall and the SPAM portions of AIS.
Hmm i am confused now, ??? So you think i should keep my OnlineArmor subscription going and install AIS custom like you did? :)
... Okay soon my License for Online Armor firewall will expire.
IMHO the OA firewall (even the free version) is overall a much better firewall (i.e.,HIPS, Program Control, etc.) than the current AIS firewall.
I did a custom install of AIS--did not install the firewall and the SPAM portions of AIS.
I would suggest avast! Silent Firewall. Its very silent and is for all (novice,pro,expert)
Does my PAID AIS have the Silent bit? :)
-
...Also its dont interfert with any gamings or something else.
Been using OA since it was first released.
Because of the HIPS/Program control you'll get a pop-up from OA when you first use an app/item asking if OK to run, otherwise OA has not interfered with my computer use. No different than using any other white list based security app.
Would assume this has not been an issue with the OP or would have not purchased OA. ;)
-
That can be very annoying that HIPS. I dont like at all this kind of feature.
If you have avast! Firewall its very silent and you can config it your self for how u want him to work.
-
Hmm i am confused now, ??? So you think i should keep my OnlineArmor subscription going and install AIS custom like you did? :)
Kind of a personal choice -- for myself yes, I like having the additional features of OA premium version--much more than just an software firewall: http://www.online-armor.com/products-online-armor-premium.php
Only reason I'm using avast! 5 IS instead of Pro is cost. ;D I have three PCs. Was using avast! 4.8 Pro on the main PC, and 4.8 Home on the other PCs. Being that the single avast! 5 license is for three PCs and the upgrade discount for avast! 5 IS, upgrading to AIS was significantly less getting Pro version licenses for three PCs.
-
That can be very annoying that HIPS. I dont like at all this kind of features.
Too each his own -- bottom line the paid version of OA is much more than just a software firewall, and has more protection features than the AIS firewall: http://www.online-armor.com/products-online-armor-premium.php
With the current zero-day vulnerabilities now day, I prefer the additional protection of a firewall with HIPS, and OA's Run Safer feature--as I noted it has not been an issue with my computer usage. There are Fx users who like and dislike the NoScript extension for the same reason.
... you can config it your self for how u want him to work.
Ditto for OA. ::)
Just because you don't like HIPS does not make it an undesirable feature for others. ;)
-
Ya still you said he paid for the suite for nothing ? And now you admit that he need to paid more for a feature that he already got in the suite ?
Kinda bad advertise for OA ? ;)
I never liked it and will never try it. Its look very bad for novice. Dreamy look to dont know alot on pc and i would recommand him avast! Firewall than your OA.
More simple to configure and more user friendly interface.
-
Mr.Agent :) & Jon_T :)
Thank you so much for your help. :) "Both of you" :)
Good Night from me. :)
Dreamy :)
-
Ya still you said he paid for the suite for nothing ? And now you admit that he need to paid more for a feature that he already got in the suite ?
Kinda bad advertise for OA ? ;)
Huh? ???
I never liked it and will never try it. Its look very bad for novice. Dreamy look to dont know alot on pc and i would recommand him avast! Firewall than your OA.
More simple to configure and more user friendly interface.
If you never tried/used OA, your posts are nothing more than uninformed opinions. :P
-
I agree with Mr. Agent. The avast! Firewall is very easy to use and very effective. It stealths all ports, makes its own program control decisions so you don't have to (denies access to known bad programs and uses a whitelist to pre-configure access for known good programs. For unknowns, it defaults to allowing access, but keeps watch for suspicious activity), blocks and identifies exploits, and has strong self-protection. It's a matter of personal preference, you want it silent, or with a HIPS (although OA is lighter on popups than most other HIPS).
-
Glooby you did understand what i mean. ;)
-
Glooby you did understand what i mean. ;)
Except for your post at the top of this page, where you mis-analyzed what I had posted, I understood what you posted which basically reiterated two personal opinions:
1. avast! firewall better than OA because it's easier to use.
2. avast! firewall better than OA because you do not like HIPS.
If you take the time and carefully re-read my posts (unlike yourself) I made no negative remarks, nor disagreed with any of the features you noted about the avast! firewall. The only items I took exception to was your "opinions" on OA, which by your own words "I never liked it and will never try it." invalidates your opinions on OA.
I agree 100% with GloobyGoob's post which is factual and without personal opinions; and as he noted comes down to one's personal preference as to which firewall to use. Using a firewall with some form of HIPS requires a little more user input, which I for myself is worth the additional protection.
Besides the fact that you do not like HIPS, the real fact is that firewall with some form of HIPS will provide better protection to some forms exploits, and as time goes on more of the top rated firewalls have been including some form of HIPS/Program Control:
http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php
Personally I've been using various software and hardware firewalls for over ten years.
-
the real fact is that firewall with some form of HIPS will provide better protection to some forms exploits
That is, if the user chooses the correct choice. If they choose wrong,they could let in a threat, which is worse.
and as time goes on more of the top rated firewalls have been including some form of HIPS/Program Control:
http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php
I wouldn't trust Matousec's tests, as they are flawed. ;) You can find a few threads in this forum (and external sources) discussing this. He considers HIPS a part of firewalls, but he disables avast's other protection modules and tests the firewall alone. The avast! Firewall is closely integrated with other components of the suite and is not meant to be a stand-alone. Furthermore, Matousec's tests are more like HIPS tests than firewall tests. Since the tester knows that every sample will be a threat, they will know to answer "No/Deny" to every popup and score 100%. However, in the real world this is not the case. Fortunately OA tends to be lighter on popups than other similar products.
I've used Online Armor and think it's great, but avast Firewall is good too. After all,it got a 4.5/5 rating on PcMag (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2358469,00.asp), and Neil J. Rubenking knows what he's doing. ;) I think that avast! Firewall is underrated by many.
-
You cant compare a simple firewall without hips and a firewall that got hips.
That what matousec did not understand he should have make a new section where its only for stealth port. So now we can see more what the firewall did stealth and did not in %.
Also Glooby is true in this case. If you choice to hips to allow something that you dont know and its a virus well too bad for you. Im find HIPS very annoying its like "Do you want to allow this????....." alots times...
-
That is, if the user chooses the correct choice.
Applies for a pop-ups for most security apps.;) (i.e.: pop-up due to FPs; awhile back when avast! defs update that deleted system files--I've reset avast!'s default settings to always prompt, not to delete). Both OA Help and pop-ups recommends that if in doubt, block. After you verify it's OK you can Allow the blocked item later.
If they choose wrong,they could let in a threat, which is worse.
Why would it be worse? If not using HIPS, there would not have been a pop-up and the threat would be "let in". In either case one would hope that their AV/AS app(s) would detect and stop/block the threat if it had any malicious behavior. If you have use OA, you should know that a program that is "Allowed" does not have the full rights as "Trusted". I have the "Automatically allow Trusted programs to access the internet" disabled.
I wouldn't trust Matousec's tests, as they are flawed. ;) You can find a few threads in this forum (and external sources) discussing this. He considers HIPS a part of firewalls, ...
First, yes I'm aware of Matousec's tests -- and would assume anyone who's been active with this forum or any other security forums would be also. Second, if you read what I posted before link I was using the Matousec's tests as an example how many firewalls are at the top now, i.e., using some form of HIPS/Program Control. Was not too long it was mainly Comodo and OA that were at the top. Third, no one should make a decision about how good/bad a app is solely on a single test. Should read several tests, and need to read how the tests were conducted.
I've used Online Armor and think it's great, but avast Firewall is good too. After all,it got a 4.5/5 rating on PcMag (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2358469,00.asp), and Neil J. Rubenking knows what he's doing. ;)
I've read/printed that review. Neil also wrote:
"... I tested the firewall's ability to detect suspicious activity using a collection of leak-test utilities. These programs demonstrate techniques that actual malware uses to sneak past simple program control-techniques like injecting code into trusted programs, or remotely controlling them. The anti-malware component did block a few of these samples, but all of the rest managed to perform their sneaky tricks without a peep out of the avast! firewall.
My ALWIL contacts explained that since there's no malicious payload in the leak test programs there's no reason for avast! to block their behavior. That makes sense. Norton Internet Security 2010 and Panda Internet Security 2010 work in just the same way. ..."
For myself, the attitude of "since there's no malicious payload in the leak test programs there's no reason to block their behavior" is not entirely a wise one. What if someone did use a method similar to leak tests to plant a zero-day malicious payload that one's AV/AS defs and behavior shield did not detect? Thus the premise for retrospective/proactive tests, which in the latest AV-Comparatives Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010 avast!'s "Total" was 29% -- i.e., missed 71%--in this test.
Bottom line is no one/type of security can provide 100% protection. Hence the best one can do is be informed of the risks (e.g., visiting security forums) and use a layered protection. HIPS is just another layer that one can use. If person does not like HIPS fine, don't use it!
-
... If you choice to hips to allow something that you dont know and its a virus well too bad for you.
Are you just regurgitating what GloobyGoob posted or do you know this for a fact? If so please explain how, and why would not avast! and/or any other AV/AS would not detect the "virus"? ???
Im find HIPS very annoying its like "Do you want to allow this????....." alots times...
Yes, I think everyone knows by now you don't like HIPS. Fine don't use it--just that simple. :P
-
Now a day there alot threat on the wild. As we say no any anti virus could detect 100 % of the anti virus. But avast! indeed do a great performance over here.
But how come if a little thing did pass and hips come to prompt me that a file is trying to connect to my pc. What would you think that i will act ? Allow or block ? PS : Pretend that i dont know anything about that file and im very novice at computer. I will allow it for sure. As i wouldnt like that if i block that its could destroy my system. Maybe ill try to find the file and scan it with my anti virus. And how come if the anti virus say its clean. Now the virus will be happy and enjoy my password and system.
-
Why would it be worse? If not using HIPS, there would not have been a pop-up and the threat would be "let in".
The Avast Firewall will deny access if it goes against the application rules. If it isn't on the list, then it will closely monitor it and block suspicious behavior/actions. That's better than choosing the wrong action to take.
If you have use OA, you should know that a program that is "Allowed" does not have the full rights as "Trusted".
I wasn't referring to OA, I meant firewalls wih HIPS in general; I replied to this: the real fact is that firewall with some form of HIPS will provide better protection to some forms exploits
Second, if you read what I posted before link I was using the Matousec's tests as an example how many firewalls are at the top now, i.e., using some form of HIPS/Program Control.
Well, if you know the test is flawed, why do you use it as a valid example? ??? And, as I have said, the tests that determine the "top firewalls" aren't firewall tests. They test the HIPS/Program Control more than the firewalls themselves. I'd like to see a real firewall test, but it's not so simple testing one.
Bottom line is no one/type of security can provide 100% protection.
True, I agree.
HIPS is just another layer that one can use. If person does not like HIPS fine, don't use it!
I'm not saying that I don't like HIPS, actually I think it's a good layer of protection! :D I have used it for a couple of years, but now I just prefer having programs that decide for me like the avast Firewall. For people that don't like HIPS, then alternatives are behavior blockers, auto-deciding firewalls, etc.
-
Anyway guy this has been solved for many time and i think its up to the user to choice the best as he want.
So good debate guys/girls.
Thank alot.
Mr.Agent
-
Just wanted to make several closing replies/comments.
The Avast Firewall will deny access if it goes against the application rules. If it isn't on the list, then it will closely monitor it and block suspicious behavior/actions. That's better than choosing the wrong action to take.
If the firewall itself is using some form of Network type IPS Intrusion Prevention System (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusion_prevention_system), then yes the wrong choice "could let in a threat". But so far what I've read about the HIPS for personal PCs they appear to be some form of Program Control-HIPS that will alert you of a app/process that trying to run and not in it's Program Control-HIPS settings.
Have only used OA. As to OA (back to the OP's inquiry) the Program Control/HIPS has it's own pop-ups, and the OA firewall has it's own separate pop-ups. If one gets a Program Control pop-up and should click "Allow" to run, if the process tries to access the internet to download (let-in) a payload it will by blocked by the firewall with the firewall pop-up.
I have tighten up the OA's Program Control Settings and Firewall Settings, and the only times I get Program Control pop-ups is after I install a new app or update an existing app.
Second, if you read what I posted before link I was using the Matousec's tests as an example how many firewalls are at the top now, i.e., using some form of HIPS/Program Control.
Well, if you know the test is flawed, why do you use it as a valid example? ??? And, as I have said, the tests that determine the "top firewalls" aren't firewall tests. They test the HIPS/Program Control more than the firewalls themselves.
If you read all that I posted was it was only example of showing how many (i.e., the number of firewalls) that are now using some form of HIPS, whereas not too long there was mainly just Comodo and OA. Would assume these firewall vendors have added some form of HIPS because they see a valid reason to do so, and not just so they could do well in the Matousec's tests. ;)
... but now I just prefer having programs that decide for me like the avast Firewall.
Guess I read too many reviews/tests, security articles :) -- but at this time I have not come across any one security app/suite I would trust enough to allow it to automatically make all the decisions. I'm in the firm belief that no one security app can catch everything, and using a layered approach overall the best security solution. Hence I'm among those (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=254465) who never been fond of using a "security suite"--having all eggs in one basket.
If you know what a zero-day vulnerability is, then you'll know that there's a risk that any AV/AS may not be able to detect; e.g., AV-Comparatives and others Retrospective/Proactive type tests.
Cheers,
Jon
-
If you read all that I posted was it was only example of showing how many (i.e., the number of firewalls) that are now using some form of HIPS, whereas not too long there was mainly just Comodo and OA.
Ah. I get what you're saying now, that more firewalls are incororating HIPS. Sorry, my bad. ;)
Guess I read too many reviews/tests, security articles -- but at this time I have not come across any one security app/suite I would trust enough to allow it to automatically make all the decisions. I'm in the firm belief that no one security app can catch everything, and using a layered approach overall the best security solution. Hence I'm among those who never been fond of using a "security suite"--having all eggs in one basket.
Yeah, I wasn't fond of suites either. I tried various combinations of antivirus's and firewalls (I used PC Tools, Online Armor, Comodo, Zonealarm, etc) for several years now. But I tried the avast Suite and was impressed. :) (I don't use just avast, I use Malwarebytes, Super Antispyware, and Hitman Pro.)
If you know what a zero-day vulnerability is, then you'll know that there's a risk that any AV/AS may not be able to detect; e.g., AV-Comparatives and others Retrospective/Proactive type tests.
Yes, I am well aware. ;) That's why I don't just rely on my Antivirus/Antispyware, I always use the use the avast sandbox to virtualize my browser and test all downloads in it, use a limited user account, etc. (And of course, common sense ^-^) My comp has never been infected once over the last several years. :)
Well I really don't want to debate over this anymore (the Thread Starter's problem has been resolved a long time ago, and this is not directly related to the question) at least not here anyway. It is pointless to keep reviving an old solved thread, so... we must let it die. Best regards, Jon_T! :D
GloobyGoob