How come noone talks about Qihoo Internet Security?

G73S

Senior member
Mar 14, 2012
635
0
0
I have a license for Bitdefender, Kaspersky, and NOD32, they are all very heavy on my system.

I tried Webroot SecureAnywhere, it was light as a feather, but had too many false positives...

so I kept researching on:

http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php

and:

http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/janfeb-2014/

and noticed this Qihoo Internet Security's performance in the 2nd link and high detection rates + low FPs thanks to it using its own engine + cloud +bitdefender Engine..

So I tried it and in fact, it didn't catch any FPs from the stuff that I have and my system felt so much snappier...

I went ahead to purchase it...only to discover that it's FREE!!

I was shocked, because it has no bloat, no ads to upgrade, no toolbars while installing...sounds too good to be true for a free solution but what the heck!!

try it if you want:

http://www.360safe.com/
 

G73S

Senior member
Mar 14, 2012
635
0
0
i've never heard of Qihoo Internet Security
me too, until I was searching for performance stats of AVs in that second link...then to verify the scores were legit, I checked the first link, both show excellent detection rates.

I tried it and was surprised by how light it is and having the Bitdefender engine + its own + cloud based detection makes it a rock solid solution.

something seems too good to be true, it acts just like paid AVs with no ads, nags, or what not
 

G73S

Senior member
Mar 14, 2012
635
0
0
nevermind, this thing is a beast of FPs!

I don't have IE installed so it detected that as a virus that several IE files are missing! WTF!! I don't want IE! leave me the hell alone!

2) it detected my private internet access vpn as a virus

3) it detected MiniTool Partition Wizard as a virus!
 

code65536

Golden Member
Mar 7, 2006
1,006
0
76
LOL @ people still using and debating the use of the Great Computing Scam Known as Anti-Virus.

Just do what I do: Never install AV. Disable Windows Defender. Learn to be security-conscious. A far better defense than drizzling this snake oil over your system.
 

ninaholic37

Golden Member
Apr 13, 2012
1,883
31
91
LOL @ people still using and debating the use of the Great Computing Scam Known as Anti-Virus.

Just do what I do: Never install AV. Disable Windows Defender. Learn to be security-conscious. A far better defense than drizzling this snake oil over your system.
Same here.
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
15,785
1,500
126
LOL @ people still using and debating the use of the Great Computing Scam Known as Anti-Virus.

Just do what I do: Never install AV. Disable Windows Defender. Learn to be security-conscious. A far better defense than drizzling this snake oil over your system.

Interesting. I had heard this prescription given for WHS-2011, because it effectively walls itself off against internet vulnerability, although the home user could certainly configure it to be a web-server. The idea with that: workstations connected to the server have their own AV filtering, so anything stored on the server would be "safe." But it was a step I couldn't let myself take, and I use ESET on the WHS box.

Let me ask you this: Have you ever "been infected?" As far as I know, the one and only time it happened to me occurred when I received the "Stoned" virus sometime around 1995. I had to use an AV program to do it, but the system was cleaned up in an hour or so.

Then I discovered that McAfee hadn't detected KLEZ in an e-mail attachment. I was suspicious enough that I didn't open the attachment, did some detective-work about the source of the e-mail, and found that my friend in another county was overrun by KLEZ. That was around 2003.

Different but related topic: I had often used my MasterCard at Target, but was just inclined to use cash for purchases over the period of time when their security was breached.

It may be a "scare" and it may be a "scam." I just feel like I'm buying more with a security suite by some great measure than the few days of "hope" I purchase with a lottery ticket.
 

MagnusTheBrewer

IN MEMORIAM
Jun 19, 2004
24,135
1,594
126
I'd never heard of it so, I looked it up. It's Chinese and may be totally legit. There stock is doing well. I do have to admit to being prejudiced against anything coming out of Beijing though.
 

oynaz

Platinum Member
May 14, 2003
2,448
2
81
LOL @ people still using and debating the use of the Great Computing Scam Known as Anti-Virus.

Just do what I do: Never install AV. Disable Windows Defender. Learn to be security-conscious. A far better defense than drizzling this snake oil over your system.

Famous last words.
 

PliotronX

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 1999
8,883
107
106
Famous last words.
IDK, AV's give a false sense of security and as a result, I have had to clean up more systems with 2, 3 sometimes even 4 AV that bog the system down more than the malware. Common sense carries with it much greater protection than any real-time AV ever made.
 
Last edited:

SlickR12345

Senior member
Jan 9, 2010
542
44
91
www.clubvalenciacf.com
Anti-virus/anti-malware is very important, but the best protection is a rock solid firewall.

You can use Comodo firewall that comes with its own cloud scan and HIPS protection or if you want simplicity you can go for Zonealarm firewall and couple both of these firewalls with Avira free antivirus and malwarebytes anti-malware.
 

Mushkins

Golden Member
Feb 11, 2013
1,631
0
0
IDK, AV's give a false sense of security and as a result, I have had to clean up more systems with 2, 3 sometimes even 4 AV that bog the system down more than the malware. Common sense carries with it much greater protection than any real-time AV ever made.

AV doesn't give any more of a false sense of security than pretending you're bulletproof because you're "too smart for viruses."

If someone's running 2, 3, or 4 AVs on top of each other, it's clear they don't understand the fundamentals of computer security in the first place and would open themselves up to infection regardless of what software tries to protect them.

AV is just one part of an overall layered security plan. It's not meant to catch every threat, and it never will. AV is there to *hopefully* catch that one off zero day attack laced into a compromised advertisement on a legitimate website via heuristics, as well as act as a safety net against older well known threats that are kicking around hoping to infect people who don't run security updates or install new versions of software. It's not a substitute for smart browsing habits.
 

PliotronX

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 1999
8,883
107
106
AV doesn't give any more of a false sense of security than pretending you're bulletproof because you're "too smart for viruses."
The informed will always encounter less infections. They will also recognize the signs and run cleanup tools on demand. I never see these computers in for repair.

If someone's running 2, 3, or 4 AVs on top of each other, it's clear they don't understand the fundamentals of computer security in the first place and would open themselves up to infection regardless of what software tries to protect them.
Precisely my point, they have the misunderstanding that the more green check marks saying they're protected, the better. I see these all the time.

AV is just one part of an overall layered security plan. It's not meant to catch every threat, and it never will. AV is there to *hopefully* catch that one off zero day attack laced into a compromised advertisement on a legitimate website via heuristics, as well as act as a safety net against older well known threats that are kicking around hoping to infect people who don't run security updates or install new versions of software. It's not a substitute for smart browsing habits.
The point here is that real-time AV is nearly useless and can in fact bog down a system all of the time. I advocate scheduled on-demand and decisive use of aggressive tools. The general populace does not want to involve themselves enough to understand this.
 

code65536

Golden Member
Mar 7, 2006
1,006
0
76
Famous last words.

I will happily eat those words if I'm ever compromised by something that AV could've stopped. People overlook that last part: the range of things that AV can stop is limited, and AV is virtually useless against exploits of software flaws that result in RCE and EoP.

So far, my track record is pristine--two decades without compromise of any sort on any computer that I personally manage (okay, there was one time a decade ago when I accidentally executed an adware installer that I was disassembling on a test computer--but I knew I what I was messing with, it was easy to clean up, and I've since been more careful when I do stuff like that, like using VMs for that kind of thing).

AV doesn't give any more of a false sense of security than pretending you're bulletproof because you're "too smart for viruses."
Who said I'm pretending?

Anyway, I'm not "bulletproof"--an insanely good unpatched 0day RCE could get me. But those things are really rare, and most importantly, the kind of stuff that can get me is also the kind of stuff that AV wouldn't have a prayer of stopping.

Whereas AV definitely gives a very dangerous false sense of security. I do cleanup for family, friends, and friends of family/friends. Unlike my computers, their computers all have AV. Yet they're the ones being compromised, not me. And the kinds of questions that I get are along the lines of "Why didn't the AV stop it?" or "What would you recommend as a better AV?"

Modern security threats are predominantly problems of social engineering and exploiting gullibility. It's fundamentally a human problem, not a technical one.

AV is just one part of an overall layered security plan. It's not meant to catch every threat, and it never will. AV is there to *hopefully* catch that one off zero day attack laced into a compromised advertisement on a legitimate website via heuristics, as well as act as a safety net against older well known threats that are kicking around hoping to infect people who don't run security updates or install new versions of software. It's not a substitute for smart browsing habits.
Even "hopefully" is way too optimistic. Once in a blue moon after double rainbows and oodles of luck is more accurate.

It's cost-vs-benefit. The cost is tremendous. Even with light AVs like Defender/MSE, disabling it results in very noticeable performance gains. In one extreme case, I have a large suite of utilities that I install on all the systems that I manage using a custom installer that I wrote. On my parents' desktop (which has MSE), it took almost a minute to install, with one core of the CPU completely pegged. On my netbook, despite having a slower CPU and slower drive, it took a few seconds.

It's worse on low-end systems: I had an Atomic nettop that I used a few years ago as a server. It was really nice and responsive because I kept it lean and AV-free. I later replaced it with a Sandy Bridge server, so I sold the nettop on eBay. Before I did that, I wiped and reinstalled the system and put in MSE. The thing was intolerably slow afterwards--a night-and-day difference from how it performed back when it had no MSE.

And there's the cost of false positives. Remember that time when installations of Excel were hosed by AV? Or the many pieces of legitimate software that get flagged as suspicious by overzealous heuristics?

We make fun of DRM and how it does very little to stop pirates and all it does is inconvenience legitimate users. Well, AV is the same. A good blackhat knows how to make their stuff fly under the AV radar. Hell, there's a whole industry devoted to doing this (go Googling for FUD crypter and you'll see what I mean). The things that AVs catch are stuff like innocent indie software that used UPX.

And the benefit? Pfft. It protects against users doing stupid things. Now, for my parents, I don't trust them to not do stupid things because they have "gullible" written on their foreheads, so I do leave MSE on their system (and also stripped admin privs from their user accounts) (and I still had to clean up two junkware installs this year). But if you're tech-savvy enough to be a regular at a forum like this, AV is not something that will give you a lot of benefit. Certainly not enough to justify the intolerable costs that it incurs.
 
Last edited:

John Connor

Lifer
Nov 30, 2012
22,840
617
121
The biggest thing about surfing the net is the user and what he/she does. Anti-virus software is something you don't necessarily need, but you will be SOL if something bad happens. Why even patch your Windows OS or download criticals if your not going to run malware protection? I use Comodo firewall, Panda Cloud, No Scrip in Pale Moon along with other privacy add-ons, but No Script is like a door before the malware protection. I also have Hitman Pro Alert Beta to stop cryptolocker.

I'm pretty safe on the net, but if I get something it will be my fault that I didn't have protection. my aunt didn't have malware protection and she got ransomware on her computer.
 

code65536

Golden Member
Mar 7, 2006
1,006
0
76
Anti-virus software is something you don't necessarily need, but you will be SOL if something bad happens.
Wrong. The range of things that AV is effective against is limited, and they are all things that a security-savvy user can avoid.

Why even patch your Windows OS or download criticals if your not going to run malware protection?
Two different types of threat vectors. AV mostly protects against the stupid user making a stupid mistake. Software and OS patches protect against exploits of software flaws (namely, RCE (remote code execution) and EoP (elevation of privilege) exploits). AV is impotent (virtually useless) at protecting against attacks that come in the way of RCE and EoP exploits. And, most importantly, exploits of software flaws often do not require the user doing something stupid. These are potentially the kinds of things that even the most security-savvy user cannot avoid and where patching the exploit is the only solution.

This is definitely not true for AV, where most of what AV is effective against is the stuff that a security-savvy user could avoid easily.

my aunt didn't have malware protection and she got ransomware on her computer.
So? My dad got ransomware too, once (though fortunately it was not Crytolocker). And he does have malware protection. And he's running as a limited user. All those stories that you hear about Cryptolocker--those victims all had malware "protection", too, and look at what good that did them.
 

John Connor

Lifer
Nov 30, 2012
22,840
617
121
Hitman Pro Alert blocks cryptolocker. Why wouldn't I want to use that. XSS, Iframes, etc and other scripts can act maliciously even though you are surfing with "caution." Pretty stupid not to even use No Script.

Point is you can surf cautionary all you want but there are malicious scripts.
 

code65536

Golden Member
Mar 7, 2006
1,006
0
76
Hitman Pro Alert blocks cryptolocker.
Now that Cryptolocker has made a big splash in the news, I'm pretty sure everything is on the lookout for it. But back when it was still flying under the radar, most AV wasn't catching it. And that's one of AV's many problems: it's fundamentally reactionary. And AV that have aggressive heuristics to catch things proactively have terrifying false positive rates.

Why wouldn't I want to use that. XSS, Iframes, etc and other scripts can act maliciously even though you are surfing with "caution." Pretty stupid not to even use No Script.

Point is you can surf cautionary all you want but there are malicious scripts.
NoScript (which I do use, but for different reasons) isn't AV, though.
 

PliotronX

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 1999
8,883
107
106
Hitman Pro Alert Beta came out pretty quick after Cryptolocker.
That is true, I was surprised! While it is not an AV it does not take up resources like an AV and it doesn't even block Cryptolocker from running; it prevents the act of encrypting personal files so it's kind of a double edged sword for the laypersons. When they see the Cryptolocker popup they freak out but are very relieved when I tell them that HitmanPro Alert w/Cryptoguard kept their files safe. It would be pertinent to, if one is without proper backups and has server shares mapped, to run this tool particularly on Windows XP.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |