I really wonder then why Avast acted like that ?
Antivirus Guide & User Reviews.
I really wonder then why Avast acted like that ?
Perhaps due to the heuristic sensitivity being set to low by default.
I can be wrong though. Just a wild guess.
^Everything was default as I had just installed it.
it's not that simple because avast did detect the created files so it should have info about the virus/malware creating such types of files.my guess is for whatever reason avast didn't scanned the memory.
^Well, that's the question, why the hell it didn't scan memory?
according to whatever i read on avast forums apparently running memory scan show a lot of false positives especially if you are running some other security software too like malwarebytes etc so it is disabled by default on some options.
That was not a good decision tbh. Removing memory scanning is like crippling antivirus.
if possible can you do a test by running memory scan when pc is running(not the usual scan memory at startup option) by scanning some folder/drive.
Sure.
AcceleratorX
Youngling
hareesh said:
Upgrade to 2013. It is actually very good but somewhat dependent on an internet connection in order to be completely effective.
harshilsharma63 said:
I would recommend you to try PC Tools Internet Security. It uses the same definitions database as Norton (Norton and PC Tools are both owned by Symantec). The initial update is some 200MB (if you use the comprehensive database, 100MB if you use compact database) and subsequent updates are 1MB-3MB. Almost as effective, very cheap, but not as feature rich as Norton. However, new program versions are to be manually downloaded from PC Tools' site.
Others you can try are eScan, BitDefender, BullGuard
Jay1234 said:
Norton is good for protection, but if you are talking about detection and removal (especially without an internet connection), it is not that good. In my experience, Norton is particularly slow in responding to new undetected malware (even PC Tools does better in this regard).
Advice: When performing first system scan after installation with Norton or PC Tools, I recommend keeping internet access ON in order to reduce the false positives.
ithehappy[/QUOTE said:
If you like it, continue with it. I have tried Symantec's three security products - PC Tools, Symantec Endpoint Protection System and Norton and I found PC Tools best suited to the sensibilities of a barebones internet security suite that is easy enough for the whole family to use. I do, however, also use Norton 360 on my laptops and I found that a mostly usable product as well, though I still prefer PC Tools. Protection is good for all three products.
BTW, AV-Test results for the Jan-Feb 2013 testing session are out:
AV-TEST - The Independent IT-Security Institute: Jan/Feb 2013
in all tests widely accepted by expert users(av-comparatives & virusbtn) pc tools never fared better or even same as norton:
*www.virusbtn.com/vb100/RAP/RAP-quadrant-Aug12-Feb13-1200.jpg
here pc tools is behind even microsoft.
*www.virusbtn.com/vb100/RAP/RAP-quadrant-Aug12-Feb13-1200.jpg
here pc tools is behind even microsoft.
AcceleratorX
Youngling
Norton does not participate in VB100 RAP tests. The reason should be obvious by now 
You can compare PC Tools and Norton in the 2010 and 2011 AV-Comparatives' tests, that's when they were tested together at the same time (you can also check AV-Test's reports). They are very close to each other, with Norton being a bit better. PC Tools rarely wins, though sometimes it does, against Norton (It does better in 1 or 2 comparatives and 1 repair test).
Check AV-Test's 2012 comparatives as well (widely accepted in industry) as well as the latest test. On-demand scan rate is pretty much the same as Norton - the dynamic protection rates are different because of different technologies (PC Tools uses ThreatFire, Norton uses SONAR).
Another reason: VB100 RAP test is based on on-demand scanning (manual scan of samples), NOT real-time scanning - it does not test the behavioural detection/protection components of the product. You will observe that the products at the top are products with very high update frequency! PC Tools updates the definitions only once a day - Norton updates twice or thrice and also has the pulse updates for urgent threats. That's why it may appear better in a few tests.
If you look at youtube tests the two products are pretty much the same performance wise.
The two products are based on different technologies but use a technological base. The clouds are the same, Norton Safe Web = PC Tools Browser Guard, for example. Only the firewall and behavioural detection component are different.
I have some malware right here detected by PC Tools but not by Norton (PC Tools has it's own database as well).
So, what I am saying is, protection wise these two products are equivalent, but Norton is better in terms of performance and features. If you don't believe me, why don't you try the product and see for yourself?
Here is, for example, one test that shows Norton performing slightly worse than PC Tools Free AntiVirus:
*translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=*www.comss.ru/page.php?id=1274
But of course, do take it with a grain of salt as it says PC Tools Internet Security does much worse.
The two products, when tested together, never score exactly the same, this is because both products contain two sets of definitions: The "smart" definitions and the "comprehensive"/"full" definitions. They do affect the detection rate, and the testers receive a default configured version in which one always uses the "smart" definitions and the other uses the "full" definitions. Thus, either Norton performs better, or PC Tools performs better.
Don't believe me? Ask AV-comparatives yourself. In 2012, Norton was not included, but it mostly does worse than PC Tools as Norton in 2012 used "smart" definitions by default while PC Tools in 2012 uses "full" definitions by default!
At the end of the day all 3 (Symantec Endpoint Protection System, Norton and PC Tools) are products of the same company. It does them no good to intentionally make one worse than the other - they have to capture the market at the respective segments. That's why all 3 have the "by Symantec" branding - it's a matter of brand integrity if the products are bad in any way. I can tell with confidence all 3 do a decent job. There is some talk that PC Tools' tech may be integrated into Norton this year (or vice versa), but we'll have to see what happens.
You can compare PC Tools and Norton in the 2010 and 2011 AV-Comparatives' tests, that's when they were tested together at the same time (you can also check AV-Test's reports). They are very close to each other, with Norton being a bit better. PC Tools rarely wins, though sometimes it does, against Norton (It does better in 1 or 2 comparatives and 1 repair test).
Check AV-Test's 2012 comparatives as well (widely accepted in industry) as well as the latest test. On-demand scan rate is pretty much the same as Norton - the dynamic protection rates are different because of different technologies (PC Tools uses ThreatFire, Norton uses SONAR).
Another reason: VB100 RAP test is based on on-demand scanning (manual scan of samples), NOT real-time scanning - it does not test the behavioural detection/protection components of the product. You will observe that the products at the top are products with very high update frequency! PC Tools updates the definitions only once a day - Norton updates twice or thrice and also has the pulse updates for urgent threats. That's why it may appear better in a few tests.
If you look at youtube tests the two products are pretty much the same performance wise.
The two products are based on different technologies but use a technological base. The clouds are the same, Norton Safe Web = PC Tools Browser Guard, for example. Only the firewall and behavioural detection component are different.
I have some malware right here detected by PC Tools but not by Norton (PC Tools has it's own database as well).
So, what I am saying is, protection wise these two products are equivalent, but Norton is better in terms of performance and features. If you don't believe me, why don't you try the product and see for yourself?
Here is, for example, one test that shows Norton performing slightly worse than PC Tools Free AntiVirus:
*translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=*www.comss.ru/page.php?id=1274
But of course, do take it with a grain of salt as it says PC Tools Internet Security does much worse.
The two products, when tested together, never score exactly the same, this is because both products contain two sets of definitions: The "smart" definitions and the "comprehensive"/"full" definitions. They do affect the detection rate, and the testers receive a default configured version in which one always uses the "smart" definitions and the other uses the "full" definitions. Thus, either Norton performs better, or PC Tools performs better.
Don't believe me? Ask AV-comparatives yourself. In 2012, Norton was not included, but it mostly does worse than PC Tools as Norton in 2012 used "smart" definitions by default while PC Tools in 2012 uses "full" definitions by default!
At the end of the day all 3 (Symantec Endpoint Protection System, Norton and PC Tools) are products of the same company. It does them no good to intentionally make one worse than the other - they have to capture the market at the respective segments. That's why all 3 have the "by Symantec" branding - it's a matter of brand integrity if the products are bad in any way. I can tell with confidence all 3 do a decent job. There is some talk that PC Tools' tech may be integrated into Norton this year (or vice versa), but we'll have to see what happens.
Last edited:
i know about VB100 test methodology but just saying why take chance when you have free products like avast & avira which fare better than pc tool/norton on VB100 & also do very good on av-comparatives.in fact it is believed by many that latest avast v8 with its new evo-gen,improved file-rep & behavioural analysis is very good & perhaps the best freeware AV this year.of course this does not take into account its performance on an already infected system(like it was discussed a few posts above) but then it is best to format & re-install rather than cleaning an infected system because you can never be sure otherwise.
ithehappy
Human Spambot
This is crazy! I don't know if I'm right, but will test for some time.
Can an Anti virus slow down internet? I've never thought it could! Well but I guess that's what happening here. Was using Avast Pro for some time, (one month actually) today I was gnawing at my internet as it was running horribly. Then suddenly I thought let's uninstall Avast, and what the f? Everything is opening normally.
As I said, I won't confirm as of yet. Will use without any kind of security for 3 days first, then I'll confirm. But is it possible?
Can an Anti virus slow down internet? I've never thought it could! Well but I guess that's what happening here. Was using Avast Pro for some time, (one month actually) today I was gnawing at my internet as it was running horribly. Then suddenly I thought let's uninstall Avast, and what the f? Everything is opening normally.
As I said, I won't confirm as of yet. Will use without any kind of security for 3 days first, then I'll confirm. But is it possible?
of course any anivirus can slow down your net connection when scanning http traffic.all the good ones like kaspersky,bitdefender,gdata etc causes slowdown in net speed in one way or other(animated/multimedia web page loading,online video etc) depending on settings used.you can try lowering down some settings for http/web scan to see if it helps.btw now-a-days greatest danger comes from web/http traffic as there are many sites which can infect your pc even by simply visiting them & not doing anything on your part(like clicking anywhere on site etc).
ithehappy
Human Spambot
Hmm, now that I didn't know! Whatever happens I'm not using anything which can show down internet. Is there any option? What is the lightest security? I don't know but I don't think I had any problems with NIS. Only reason I didn't like it was the false positives.
in avast web shield settings look for some setting named heuristic & set it to light & then try.in worst case scenario turn off the web shield completely to check if it is indeed the reason for your net slowdown.
AcceleratorX
Youngling
@ithehappy: Give ZoneAlarm Free AV+Firewall a try, or if you want to try a paid solution give a try to BullGuard, AVG and Norton/PC Tools. They seem (to me) to be fairly light w.r.t internet browsing slowdown.
Even I have seen slowdowns in my parents' PC running Norton. Though I haven't seen any noticeable effect while running avast. Can't there be a trade-off, like say as you have mentioned to set the heuristic to low and at the same time use a secure DNS server like from Norton or Comodo? Personally on dns benchmark tests, they fare almost equal to Google DNS and always are faster than Open DNS. (PS : I don't use BSNL DNS since it doesn't allow me to open certain websites even though it performs the best in DNS benchmarks.)