How good of Anti-Virus is ClamWin?

[joey tribiani]

How good of Anti-Virus is ClamWin? Is this A Good Free Client?Thanks!

[lifehacker]

Its only a small free on demand scanner that has is has pretty terrible identification and signatures. I wouldnt reccomed it at all. If youre looking for a good AV try NOD32, Kaspersky, or BitDefender. Those are the three best AVs. NOD32 has the best heurestics; Kaspersky the best signatures; BitDefender the best OD scanner. NOD32 uses the least resources while BitDefender uses the most. What are your specs? How much protection do you need?

[lifehacker]

Here is a thread that has a lot of AV talk: http://www.zeropaid.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=36793&highlight=programs
Also check out
wilderssecurity.com
av-comperatives.org
And dont use what you get in google results for "best antivirus" because that info will mostly be wrong.

[vixenk]

Another site you might be interested in would be virus.gr. The site is owned by a virus collector that owns one of the world's largest virus collections. He occasionally unleashes samples in his collection on a bunch of anti-viruses to see how well they do at detecting them.

As for Clamwin... I wouldn't really say it's the best of anti-viruses. Like lifehacker said, it's only an on demand scanner *which takes FOREVER to scan* that has crappy detection rates.

As far as free anti-viruses go, I would suggest Bitdefender. Low system resource usage *compared to other free anti-viruses* + real time & scheduled scanning + high detection rates. :)

[Lehk]

i find Avira's Anti-Vir to be quite nice (used to be H+BEDV)

http://www.avira.com/en/products/index.html

uses few resources and i don't have to disable while gaming.

can exclude game executables from file read scanning so AV doesn't slow your loading

[lifehacker]

As far as free anti-viruses go, I would suggest Bitdefender.
BitDefender's free OD scanner is very good. BitDefender actually has probably the best OD scanner out of all the AVs.


i find Avira's Anti-Vir to be quite nice (used to be H+BEDV)
AntiVir is considered by most to be the best free AV. But it only goes that far- the best of the free ones. It's light though but doesn't have support for Adware/Spyware detection. It also doesnt have an email scanner and the heurestics are bad. Ussually it used 4mb when I was testing it but compared to AVs which is light, but when you compare it to Kaspersky 6 (its still in testing and not-released) or NOD32 or even f-prot (uses less resources than AntiVir) which use about the same amount of resources but have much better protection, Anti-vir is just not worth it unless of course youre looking for a free AV.

[SteelerBabe]

i am a avast anti-virus user, it has kept me virus free for 2 years. there are actually alot of good free anti-virus programs out there to choose from. here is a link for avast if anyone want to try it out......http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html

[axlman]

Yeah, I use Bitdefender IS. It has Antivirus and it does use quite a bit of resources, but I have 2gb of Memory so I don't notice it much.

[Andrew110]

I like avast myself, I don't notice it's there.

[Lehk]

BitDefender's free OD scanner is very good. BitDefender actually has probably the best OD scanner out of all the AVs.


AntiVir is considered by most to be the best free AV. But it only goes that far- the best of the free ones. It's light though but doesn't have support for Adware/Spyware detection. It also doesnt have an email scanner and the heurestics are bad. Ussually it used 4mb when I was testing it but compared to AVs which is light, but when you compare it to Kaspersky 6 (its still in testing and not-released) or NOD32 or even f-prot (uses less resources than AntiVir) which use about the same amount of resources but have much better protection, Anti-vir is just not worth it unless of course youre looking for a free AV.


AntiVir Does have malware detection
it does scan email
it also is able to detect clients for backdoors like bo2k,
modem dialers,
games,
joke apps (format, deleting c, flipping the screen etc.)

you can also set a list of files and folders not to scan

[lifehacker]

AntiVir Does have malware detection
it does scan email
Are we talking about the Classic edition or the premium edition? The Classic edition (free) does not while the Premium does.


i am a avast anti-virus user, it has kept me virus free for 2 years. there are actually alot of good free anti-virus programs out there to choose from. here is a link for avast if anyone want to try it out......http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html
Avast is ok, though I would say AntiVir is better. AntiVir has slightly better heurestics. Theyre both just average however when you compare them to other better Avs.

[soundmaster inc]

when i got bitdefender ,troubles started in halo multiplayer,network error appeared (or something i don tremember)i was playing normally for a while and in the middle of the game.boom ,game closed.
when i uninstalled bitdefender the problem was gone.

[Krell]

Any antivirus running real tme scanning or a suite that also monitors network traffic and scripting can interfere with online gaming.

.

[soundmaster inc]

as long as i explored defenders settings i didn t saw a solution to this

[pimpinaman]

Unlike some of the folks here I do like clamwin. It is slow on the scanning though. I read about a good program that ties in hand in hand with clamwin called Winpooch (http://winpooch.free.fr/home/index.php). If gives some active protection if you choose to use clamwin. I love the ideas behind open source, so I try to choose FOSS when I can :)

[lifehacker]

when i got bitdefender ,troubles started in halo multiplayer,network error appeared (or something i don tremember)i was playing normally for a while and in the middle of the game.boom ,game closed.
when i uninstalled bitdefender the problem was gone.
I play Halo and was tested it with BitDefender and had no problems. What there some error message?

[soundmaster inc]

i don t remember exectly ,the message might have been" networking error

[davetheman]

I think AVG is the best AV program.

[lifehacker]

I think AVG is the best AV program.
First of all there is no best antivirus. And secind of all youre simply wrong. AVG can be reccomended for people who dont use Warez, porn and sites like that that could give you viruses. Its good for a user like that because it has low resource usage and some average protection. However in general AVG is not even close to being a the best AV. Its heurestics are bad the signatures update not as fast as some other AVs, and its on-demand scanner could have been better.


Unlike some of the folks here I do like clamwin. It is slow on the scanning though. I read about a good program that ties in hand in hand with clamwin called Winpooch (http://winpooch.free.fr/home/index.php). If gives some active protection if you choose to use clamwin. I love the ideas behind open source, so I try to choose FOSS when I can :)
Interesting ive never heard of WinPooch, I think Ill try it out and see if its any good.

[Malakai1911]

First of all there is no best antivirus. And secind of all youre simply wrong. AVG can be reccomended for people who dont use Warez, porn and sites like that that could give you viruses. Its good for a user like that because it has low resource usage and some average protection. However in general AVG is not even close to being a the best AV. Its heurestics are bad the signatures update not as fast as some other AVs, and its on-demand scanner could have been better.[

I agree with you there. KAV is fine for the average person perhaps, but if a warezer is looking for an AV, I reccomend Avast! if they want a free one (for whatever reason, if you like warez, you'll probably download a pay one 'illegally'). Avast! is "better" in my opinion because the herustic detection and definitions are much better.

But I think Nod32 and KAV take the crown because they each have their respective strengths (Nod's herustics, KAV's unpacker, and they both have really great definitions). Both are pay, but probably worth it.

[lifehacker]

I agree with you there. KAV is fine for the average person perhaps, but if a warezer is looking for an AV, I reccomend Avast! if they want a free one (for whatever reason, if you like warez, you'll probably download a pay one 'illegally'). Avast! is "better" in my opinion because the herustic detection and definitions are much better.
Im not sure I quite agree with you here. Kaspersky (KAV) is by far better than Avast!... It has much better heurestics, better signatures and the new yet unreleased version has options such as registry defender and special area scans that Avast! does not have. KAV's OD scanner is also much better. Are you sure youre not confusing KAV with something else?


But I think Nod32 and KAV take the crown because they each have their respective strengths (Nod's herustics, KAV's unpacker, and they both have really great definitions). Both are pay, but probably worth it.
: ) I thought you said KAV wasnt very good in the first paragraph... Anyways yes KAV, NOD32 and also Bitdefender are the top three. BitDefender has the best OD scanner, KAV the best signatures (and v6 the most useful options and special scans and protections), NOD32 the best heurestics. Also f-prot is a very good AV for low resource users. NOD32 has the lowest resource usage out of the three best while BitDefender has the highest (though f-prot has an even lower resource usage than NOd32). KAV v6 also has a low resource usage (lower than v5). Any of those three AVs should be enough for almost any person although some additional software might be required to protect the registry and against unvalid processes.

Currently I am using KAV v6 and love it. I have also tested and used countless other AVs and my decision lies with KAV v6. For second place I would put NOD32, for third BitDefender, for fourth f-prot.

[soundmaster inc]

this discussion reminds me something,is there any software review sites that i could trust.
long time ago i found this page http://www.toptenreviews.com/ .
if you know something better let me know.

[edgecat0r]

I have no idea where these guys get their info. ClamWin has one of the best detection rates. If it is something rather new, then it is detected by it. The problems are more with old malware (it isn't that great at detecting those). ClamWin was the first to detect some of the largest outbreaks of 2004 and 2005, with response times that rival the "big guys". PCWelt (a German magazine) actually did a comparison with one of the more recent threats, which put it as one of the top ones.

The guy who runs virus.gr is a shady character and he has created a few "comparisons" that were from samples from some commercial AV companies (or something like that). If you read the fine print on the site, then you can see that it is a sham. His "findings" are discredited and are just as bad as the ones done by av-test.de

In short, don't believe the hype. ;-)

Oh, and install more than one AV product. For god sakes, turn off on-access (this slows down your computer - like you wouldn't believe). Just don't do anything stupid (scan before running anything on Windows). Since ClamWin doesn't interfere with other AV products, feel free to install it.

[lifehacker]

this discussion reminds me something,is there any software review sites that i could trust.
long time ago i found this page http://www.toptenreviews.com/ .
if you know something better let me know.
No thats not the best place to get your info. Some good sites are wilderssecurity.com av-comparatives.org and the sites listed on av-comperatives.org


I have no idea where these guys get their info. ClamWin has one of the best detection rates. If it is something rather new, then it is detected by it.
Thats called heuristics and clam-win's heuristics suck.


ClamWin was the first to detect some of the largest outbreaks of 2004 and 2005, with response times that rival the "big guys". PCWelt (a German magazine) actually did a comparison with one of the more recent threats, which put it as one of the top ones.
Listen, most magazines and websites that review AVs are wrong on about everything. Thats why you will see all the time reviews saying Norton is the best. Here is an article on the topic why some reviews are better than others: http://esac.kaspersky.fr/index.php?PageID=9 There are only some reviews which you can trust and searching google for reviews ussually does not help



Oh, and install more than one AV product.
Youre a dumbass, installing more than one AV and running them in real-time will create tons of problems.


For god sakes, turn off on-access (this slows down your computer - like you wouldn't believe)
Thats the whole point of an AV to block viruses once they are accessed. If you have it off you might as well only use a scanner.

[vixenk]

Youre a dumbass, installing more than one AV and running them in real-time will create tons of problems.
Erm, he said afterwards to "turn off on-access" *I'm assuming he was talking about real-time scanning*, and suggested using a scanner that doesn't even have real-time scanning in it. And, well, you can leave real-time on if you want to watch two anti-viruses quarrel with each other, lol.

It is actually smart to have two anti-viruses installed, with only one having real-time scanning enabled. That way, if your main one doesn't catch a virus, you can scan your hdd with your backup anti-virus. The ideal situation would be your main anti-virus having excellent definitions, and your backup having excellent heuristics. :)


I have no idea where these guys get their info. ClamWin has one of the best detection rates. If it is something rather new, then it is detected by it. The problems are more with old malware (it isn't that great at detecting those). ClamWin was the first to detect some of the largest outbreaks of 2004 and 2005, with response times that rival the "big guys". PCWelt (a German magazine) actually did a comparison with one of the more recent threats, which put it as one of the top ones.

The guy who runs virus.gr is a shady character and he has created a few "comparisons" that were from samples from some commercial AV companies (or something like that). If you read the fine print on the site, then you can see that it is a sham. His "findings" are discredited and are just as bad as the ones done by av-test.de

In short, don't believe the hype. ;-)
Don't try to discredit a site just because your favorite anti-virus didn't do well on their tests. Google some more independent tests done by students/hobbyists/etc. - you'll see Clamwin doesn't normally do too well on them, but then again, you'll probably find something wrong with every single one of those tests, too. :P

Oh, and I reread the "fine print", as you put it *funny considering it's at THE TOP OF THE FREAKING PAGE!*, and nothing is shady about it - the guy made sure that each of the virus samples weren't in the wild but actually known about *VS2000 is a program for sorting virus collections*. He checked his samples against Kaspersky, F-Prot, Nod32, Dr.Web and McAfee and made sure at least one of them knew about each sample. The samples came from his OWN PRIVATE COLLECTION. There's no "sham" - you just obviously didn't understand it, so you ASSUMED it was a sham.

Now, cough up some quotes that show his findings are discredited instead of just making shady claims about it! *starts tapping my foot*

[lifehacker]

It is actually smart to have two anti-viruses installed, with only one having real-time scanning enabled. That way, if your main one doesn't catch a virus, you can scan your hdd with your backup anti-virus. The ideal situation would be your main anti-virus having excellent definitions, and your backup having excellent heuristics. :)
Thats true, I have Kaspersky 6 running but for backup have BitDefender, F-prot, NOD32 and some other AVs just for testing purposes installed. Mostly I just use BitDefender for OD scanning as it works faster than the other ones.

[vixenk]

Thats true, I have Kaspersky 6 running but for backup have BitDefender, F-prot, NOD32 and some other AVs just for testing purposes installed. Mostly I just use BitDefender for OD scanning as it works faster than the other ones.

LOL, you sound like me. ;)

[littlebits]

I tired BitDefender (the trial version) since it has so many good reviews. It is an excellent program but it didn't work for me. It was too slow, made my computer run slow at startup and in general. It uses a lot of resources and 7 processes. It was almost as slow as Norton. BitDefender took 4 hours to scan my hard drive. So I decided to try Nod32 and so far it is the best program that I tried so far. Nod32 uses very little resources and only 2 processes. Nod32 took only one hour and 45min to scan my hard drive. I have Avast as a backup and it uses little resources and only 4 processes. Avast took a little over 2 hours to scan my hard drive. I believe Avast is the best free anti-virus software that I have tried but I haven't tired Avira yet. I tried AVG and I didn't like how it just deletes something without asking you first. It deleted a dll file one time that I needed for a another program, I couldn't even restore it because it didn't have a virus vault.

Thanks.

[soundmaster inc]

avast has got something that i haven t seen before,it s boottime scanner

[lifehacker]

I tired BitDefender (the trial version) since it has so many good reviews. It is an excellent program but it didn't work for me. It was too slow, made my computer run slow at startup and in general. It uses a lot of resources and 7 processes.
Some AVs interact strangely with other programs. For example for me f-prot, one of the the lowest AV resource users causes huge CPU usage of other processes for no apparent reason. And yes BitDefender does use a lot of resources but I only remember 5 processes. Are you sure its seven?


BitDefender took 4 hours to scan my hard drive.
Thats very strange. BitDefender has the best On-demand scanner. It should be much faster than that. How much data was it scanning?


So I decided to try Nod32 and so far it is the best program that I tried so far. Nod32 uses very little resources and only 2 processes.
NOD32 is a great AV.

[littlebits]

Yes BitDefender used 7 processes,

bdss.exe
bdmcon.exe
vsserv.exe
livesrv.exe
xcommsvr.exe
bdnagen.exe
bdswitch.exe

Yes I have a lot of data on my hard drive, 30.1 GB and I've tried many on-demand scanners including Norton, McAfee, AVG, F-prot, F-Secure, Kaspersky, Avast and PC-cillin. Nod32 was the fastest on for my hard drive and Avast was second. Norton and BitDefender took the longest time to scan my hard drive. Everyone's system could give different results, for example most of the anti-virus tests and reviews are done on systems that are pretty much empty. So you really can't depend on those reviews when you have a large hard drive because the results will be different.

Thanks.:icon_thum

[lifehacker]

Interesting. I ussually perform my own tests, and for me BitDefender was by far faster than all of the other ones.

[ccc1005]

Definately gotta go with Kaspersky, they 6.0 Beta just got released, so look for it soon. Its the best AV i have seen so far.

[lifehacker]

Definately gotta go with Kaspersky, they 6.0 Beta just got released, so look for it soon. Its the best AV i have seen so far.
Again, its different for everyone. Some people prefer combinations of different security apps., Others preder one strong one. Some security apps work well on some computers others cause problems. I also use Kaspersky 6 but that does not mean that there is one best AV that rules over all others.

[vixenk]

I find the Bitdefender issue rather strange, myself. On my system, it was the quickest *free* AV to start, didn't slow down file browsing noticeably, and also used the least amount of resources while scanning my main hdd *100 gig* on low priority *a feature I loved about it*, although the scheduled scans did take longer due to their low priority status, they didn't bother me one bit if I was using my computer at the time, so there was no reason to have an issue for the amount of time it took to scan.

It takes different strokes for different folks, though. :)

Oh, I believe someone made mention earlier about Antivir... while I wouldn't suggest it being your main anti-virus, I can vouch that it makes an excellent backup when configured to its maximum settings. :)