-
I want to thank all the members that have upgraded your accounts. I truly appreciate your support of the site monetarily. Supporting the site keeps this site up and running as a lot of work daily goes on behind the scenes. Click to Support Signs101 ...
Avast Users Anyone?
- Thread starter WildWestDesigns
- Start date
Same here; but also use Malwarebytes which is focused as the name implies on Malware.
WildWestDesigns
Active Member
Since it's heavily tied into Windows, that can be a pro or a con. I have my own concerns (may be tin foil out based), the one thing that I don't like about Defender is that it is tied into the OS. MS has has a habit of tying in programs (that are theirs) that make it hard for the user to remove them and use what you want, so at times they can be at odds with whatever "you" are wanting to run. I prefer things to be modular and take bits and pieces that I want. I know, that isn't really about does it do a good job or not, just remember that it is tied into MS and what concerns one may have for that. I don't like the fact that they (MS) is getting really bad about interjecting ads to users that they are putting in adds in WordPad. Friggin' WordPad.
Now, tabling that, from what I have heard, it seems to be a mixed bag. Some like it and some don't. I think to a certain degree, they are all "six in one, half a dozen in the other".
Malware is a broad umbrella term that is a catchall. Virus, ransomware, adware, just forms of malware. Now, if they focus are a specific subset of malware, that could be something else. I have used that program many years ago, I remember liking it, but I haven't kept up as to what they try to target/focus on now.
I have to say, due to the nature of anti whatever you want to run, really vet it, because the level of access that it has on the computer, willingly from the user, can be just as bad as what they are supposed to be protecting one from.
Now, tabling that, from what I have heard, it seems to be a mixed bag. Some like it and some don't. I think to a certain degree, they are all "six in one, half a dozen in the other".
Malware is a broad umbrella term that is a catchall. Virus, ransomware, adware, just forms of malware. Now, if they focus are a specific subset of malware, that could be something else. I have used that program many years ago, I remember liking it, but I haven't kept up as to what they try to target/focus on now.
I have to say, due to the nature of anti whatever you want to run, really vet it, because the level of access that it has on the computer, willingly from the user, can be just as bad as what they are supposed to be protecting one from.
Good points all. One thing I really like aboubt that integration is that Windows has a specific ransomeware controlled access that allows you to identify particular directories to revoke access. Also has ability to whitelist apps that need access to those folders. Check out https://www.howtogeek.com/511744/do-you-need-anti-ransomware-software-for-your-pc/
Had a customer recently hacked and ransomed, shut them down for a week.
WildWestDesigns
Active Member
I not going to be thought well of after my saying this, but I firmly believe that ransomware shouldn't be a thing. I do not know of an instance to where if a user had done appropriate backups, it is just wipe and deploy. Now depending on how long one has gone between when the issue happened and their last backup, may have some data loss there, but it is no were near as bad or crippling as it would have been without a back up schema in place.
As storage has gone down significantly over the years for what one gets, this really shouldn't be an issue. Wipe and deploy the backups.
I also believe one OS is more susceptible to malware in general then the others and it's really not due to the size of it's user base, although that is icing on the cake. But I digress.
No hate here, but 'Shouldn't' is irrelevant. I probably shouldn't leave a package on the seat of my car but locking the car will still keep a large number of miscreants out if i forget. Having a Ransomware protection, backup strategy, antivirus etc. in place is the same as being in the habit of locking your car. My example customer (a product distributor) actually had offsite backups but they were a week old so they lost a week of data - hundreds of orders, invoices etc. for them. Storing backups on mapped drives and local attached storage can be hacked and encrypted. So a combined strategy of local, offsite physical, and incremental cloud backup is probably best.
PS - Although they are certainly out there and likely more so in the graphics business, I personally don't know many businesses that keep their primary business data on systems using the 'other' OS you no doubt refer to, so user base is probably is the driver for what thieves target.
bannertime
Active Member
Yup, I've changed loyalty quite a bit over the past 10-15 years. Norton, AVG, Avast have been my main ones that we've actually purchased. We were really considering ESET for our next purchase, but Windows Defender/Malwarebytes has been a solid team. I don't even use Malwarebytes that often anymore either. They kept pushing notifications, a big no-no in my book. Our biggest defense is safe web browsing, plugging usb drives into non-network computers, having emails scanned by our mail server, on site and offsite backups, etc.
WildWestDesigns
Active Member
Absolutely, don't want to use mapped drives for NAS related stuff. This also goes back to implementations of one particular OS as well, which are protocols used by the other OSs for compatibility. This is actually how Macs can be used as a typhoid mary and even though they won't get affected by the Windows virus, they can spread it, especially with the use of mapped drives that can be seen by Windows computers.
I actually use a desktop OS that doesn't even have 2% marketshare, but people's data, if it's on servers (local or otherwise), is on this OS more then likely. At that point, it's usually how their servers are set up (I think it was the Apache server issue that got one company a couple of years back, off by default, they turned it on to do something and then didn't disable it again after they were done).
User base plays a part, but it doesn't help matters when the largest user base is using an OS that has legacy code in it and even with their latest iteration, zero days are being reported that date back to the mid 90s as being in existence. There are other concerns, but that is the biggest. Well that and a lot of security features have been "toned down" to make things easier or more convenient for the users. That doesn't help either.
Last edited:
WildWestDesigns
Active Member
Do you run no-script (or similar)? Some bad stuff can be mild, but still be bad. Also do you run a true firewall, hardware based? What about your routers? Support on those doesn't last any where near as long as how long people keep them, that's also another vector. Any IoT devices?
The more connected we get, the more we have to worry about these things. A huge reason why I don't like this "always connected" manifesto that everyone seems to be subscribing too. Especially for production machines.
Going back to backups. There was a deal last year about dentist offices getting hacked and ransomed, but through the most unlikely of places. The software client of their online backup service. The online backup service was hacked and malware sent to their clients using their backup software.
Brave new world out there.
Agreed 100%
I haven't used it in a long time, so it could be better, but McAfee used to lock up and slow down my computer constantly.
brycesteiner
New Member
This is one of the reasons I really like my macs. Are they perfect? nope but just smart browsing takes care of things (for the most part Windows would be okay too but click on the wrong thing and you're scrawed). No ransomware has ever caused someone to pay on the Mac. No subscriptions or hits from the anti-virus.
I also think Linux is great, in fact, probably better than the Mac but my software wouldn't run! I put Linux on my parents computer 10 years ago and it's still going just fine. Before that my brother and I were fixing windows constantly for them. They would click on things all the time. You just cannot train everyone for these things and Linux helps with that tremendously.
I do not understand how Windows 10 is still falling into the ransomware problems. Is this all in the name of compatibility?
I also think Linux is great, in fact, probably better than the Mac but my software wouldn't run! I put Linux on my parents computer 10 years ago and it's still going just fine. Before that my brother and I were fixing windows constantly for them. They would click on things all the time. You just cannot train everyone for these things and Linux helps with that tremendously.
I do not understand how Windows 10 is still falling into the ransomware problems. Is this all in the name of compatibility?
WildWestDesigns
Active Member
Some ransomware affects your typical file formats that are able to be read on any system, so it really doesn't matter what you run. For instance, I think back in 2015-2016 there was malware being injected via the browser when infected PDFs were being read in browser. This affected all OSs. Things like that. Macs can actually get nasty stuff via macros being run on Office for Mac (go figure).
I run 100% Linux (yes I know that's going to get some eye rolling as people are tired of hearing/reading about it). It has it's issues, but nowhere near like on Windows. Sad thing is that it only has approx 2% of the desktop market. I am running in production a beta of what will come out this April as the next LTS release of Kubuntu. In production, main office rig. I haven't had one lick of problems compared to what happens with Windows on a regular basis on their supposed stable release (which is nonexistent as the current always updated model means that it is in a perpetual state of beta as it's effectively rolling release and since it's in a constant state of beta, issues are expected). Then, of course, on the Mac side, while it has been doing better, the first "stable" release of both High Sierra and Catalina had their issues, right off the bat. No system is perfect
As far as Windows and it's susceptibility. Some of it is users. Due to MS, in my opinion and only my opinion, being lax with security (how permissions are handled in Windows is no bueno at all, it's improved from the 9x era, but it doesn't compare to the Unix-like OSs (Linux/Mac) for extreme usability has really affected how people use the computer. Now your powerusers are a different story, but they don't make up the majority of the user base. It's those that just want to get work done and they view using a computer as a means to end (which is a shame in severally different ways, including efficiency in the workplace (like leaving money on the table in some instances)).
There are a few concerns in my mind with regard to Windows being a insecure:
1. Legacy code - the fact that we are hearing reports of zero days that have code that has existed in Windows since the 9X days is a concern. This also may mean that programmers are targeting those older APIs, which makes their programs susceptible as well.
2. Updates - ever since MS let go of their internal QA team a few yrs ago (2 or 3 yrs I think), updates really hasn't been all that it's cracked up to be. Now some haven't had a lick of problems and that's great, then you have some, like my dad, whose every major update ( 2 times a year), something has always fubar'ed his system and he doesn't have a slouch of a system (just put in a threadripper with 64GB Dominator, and an Asus TRX40), nor an old one.
3. Permission - In this case, how Windows handles them. Under the UNIX philosophy, no user is trusted right out of the gate. In Windows, if you only have a one account system, congratulations you are perpetually running in root/su/admin.
4. Telemetry - regardless if you have nothing to hide (which is a very poor excuse for the issue at hand), this is lines of communication that are open and the user cannot close. That means that is an area that can be possibly exploited. Unless you trust that they aren't a point of vulnerability, then that goes into how much do your trust your system?
Now, the listed items above are only my opinion, so take them for what that is worth.
As far software, running VMs is a great way to obfuscate the issue of software not running on whatever host OS that you want. Since you use Mac, I would highly suggest something that doesn't work off openGL, but off of Metal, this would take off the table VirtualBox, at least as of right now. VMWare is a very good solution (it also works off Linux). Properly spec'ed out, most of the software that we would run would run just fine in a VM. Shoot, I can even edit HD videos in realtime in a VM.
I run 100% Linux (yes I know that's going to get some eye rolling as people are tired of hearing/reading about it). It has it's issues, but nowhere near like on Windows. Sad thing is that it only has approx 2% of the desktop market. I am running in production a beta of what will come out this April as the next LTS release of Kubuntu. In production, main office rig. I haven't had one lick of problems compared to what happens with Windows on a regular basis on their supposed stable release (which is nonexistent as the current always updated model means that it is in a perpetual state of beta as it's effectively rolling release and since it's in a constant state of beta, issues are expected). Then, of course, on the Mac side, while it has been doing better, the first "stable" release of both High Sierra and Catalina had their issues, right off the bat. No system is perfect
As far as Windows and it's susceptibility. Some of it is users. Due to MS, in my opinion and only my opinion, being lax with security (how permissions are handled in Windows is no bueno at all, it's improved from the 9x era, but it doesn't compare to the Unix-like OSs (Linux/Mac) for extreme usability has really affected how people use the computer. Now your powerusers are a different story, but they don't make up the majority of the user base. It's those that just want to get work done and they view using a computer as a means to end (which is a shame in severally different ways, including efficiency in the workplace (like leaving money on the table in some instances)).
There are a few concerns in my mind with regard to Windows being a insecure:
1. Legacy code - the fact that we are hearing reports of zero days that have code that has existed in Windows since the 9X days is a concern. This also may mean that programmers are targeting those older APIs, which makes their programs susceptible as well.
2. Updates - ever since MS let go of their internal QA team a few yrs ago (2 or 3 yrs I think), updates really hasn't been all that it's cracked up to be. Now some haven't had a lick of problems and that's great, then you have some, like my dad, whose every major update ( 2 times a year), something has always fubar'ed his system and he doesn't have a slouch of a system (just put in a threadripper with 64GB Dominator, and an Asus TRX40), nor an old one.
3. Permission - In this case, how Windows handles them. Under the UNIX philosophy, no user is trusted right out of the gate. In Windows, if you only have a one account system, congratulations you are perpetually running in root/su/admin.
4. Telemetry - regardless if you have nothing to hide (which is a very poor excuse for the issue at hand), this is lines of communication that are open and the user cannot close. That means that is an area that can be possibly exploited. Unless you trust that they aren't a point of vulnerability, then that goes into how much do your trust your system?
Now, the listed items above are only my opinion, so take them for what that is worth.
As far software, running VMs is a great way to obfuscate the issue of software not running on whatever host OS that you want. Since you use Mac, I would highly suggest something that doesn't work off openGL, but off of Metal, this would take off the table VirtualBox, at least as of right now. VMWare is a very good solution (it also works off Linux). Properly spec'ed out, most of the software that we would run would run just fine in a VM. Shoot, I can even edit HD videos in realtime in a VM.
WildWestDesigns
Active Member
Think of how many companies that people use knowing full well that's what they do with the info. Think of how many people have had user data hacked (MS just had one recently talked about that exposed user account data going back yrs). It is definitely big business, both legit and otherwise.
What makes this particularly repugnant is the fact that this is an OEM that is providing a software that would fall under the heading of "security" and this is a very unsecure thing to do at the very least. Atleast in my opinion anyway, so take it for what it's worth.