TFG's Best Anti-Malware Picks

	Anti-virus and Computer Security by The F@t Guy

TFG's Best Anti-Malware Picks 2011 - The F@t Guy's Recommended Software List

030111: Well, Here we are again - My picks for anti-malware utilities for 2011

As always, our particular testing criteria are based largely upon what we consider to be the most effective software in real-life use, upon real-world, infected machines which pass across the testbenches here in the PIT of DOOOOM!!! This criteria tends to bias us greatly toward those things which are best in on-demand scanning, as that is the lion's share of what we do. That bias seems to be a good one, because regardless of whatever real-time effectiveness might be featured in an anti-malware product, it is pretty standard knowlege that on-demand is normally more effective than real-time, and also because on-demand scanning is the very last onboard tool available to the user - And therefore must be completely bulletproof.

The way this works is pretty simple - When I diagnose an infected box, I use at least five anti-virus tools every time. On each machine being diagnosed, the order of those candidate anti-malware tools is changed up, and my observations are determined by which anti-malware leaves the least for the others to pick up. Since the order is different every time, it doesn't take long for some pretty clear (albeit subjective) results.
In addition to the anti-malware products that I own personally, other candidates are downloaded into my test benches as trialware, and run as long as their trial period allows (generally 30 days). The entire testing period runs a general course of 60 days upon 3 test benches.

The only other parameter placed upon these tests is to disqualify the anti-malware products that are native (and updated properly) on each infected box, as the product obviously didn't do a good job in the first place. This disqualifier is a bit of a mini-test in it's own right, as it is important to note which softwares come in to the bench most frequently being ineffective in their native responsibilities. Without a doubt, this indicator is somewhat unfair, and very subjective, as new client's boxes are generally what I get to work upon. Once those clients have been informed on how to keep their boxes clean, they tend to be less likely to return with an infection. This may be due to that education, it may be due to the conversion of the box to anti-malware that I recommend, it may be due to the user turning over a new leaf, or many other incidental statistical anomalies that I cannot begin to calculate in such a short time. Even so, it is a caution.

And the winners this year will not surprise many who know me - in fact, this page is becoming so very ordinary in it's presentation every winter, as to be rather ho-hum...

Our Anti-Virus Picks:

As far as detection is concerned, the top of the heap, as always, remains in the hands of Kaspersky antivirus.
Following closely, Nod32 by Esset.
After that, by a small margin, F-Protect, Sophos, and BitDefender, and added to this list this year, the free offering by Microsoft, Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE).

Dr.Web always deserves an honorable mention, but it's tendencies (as always) toward false positives make it less desireable in the hands of joe-user.

As far as my hand-picked fav is concerned... That remains the same as last year. Our house brand had been F-Protect since dropping Symantec in utter disgust in 2002. The main reason for that has always been bang-for-buck. It is not the best, but it is really very good - Our continued blessing has been tipped by a really easy user interface, lighter resource consumption, and an extremely nice price, especially for multiple machines. Those attributes have not been diminished in any way.

But my main complaints against Kaspersky are all but gone. While it is still somewhat heavier than F-Protect, it's superior performance in detection justifies the resource expense. It is substantially less resource intensive than it has been in the past - and is nearing the point of nimbleness. Kaspersky has also worked hard to deliver a decent multi-use package... This is critical in this day and age, when most households own more than one computer... Their 3-seat package is very comparable to F-protect's 5-seat package, and their corporate package is only about double the F-protect corporate package. This is a substantial drop in cost.

And one of my complaints against Nod32 was removed last year, too - They have finally come out with a nice user interface - the confusion of yesteryear is now gone. And they are still among the lightest on resources of all. The only thing eliminating Nod32 from my fav pick is their lack of a reasonable multi-user license..

Sophos and Bitdefender remain snugged up hard against the leaders from below as well - Their ability to detect successfully is excellent.

And the biggest suprise of all, Microsoft Security Essentials (imagine me, of all people, recommending a Microsoft product! :D ) - It has become irreplaceable on my bench. It's detection rates remain very close in ability to my top pick, and it can be said that, for certain root kits, it has excelled even beyond my favorite.

While all of the above are good, even excellent, my pick this year is going to Kaspersky again. This remains a serious change from F-Protect, which has been my pick for many years. I am willing to pay the difference in price and resources in order to obtain their hallmark security, and my "main" and "hard service" machines run KAV. However, my laptop, and the majority of my house machines (my kids' and wife's boxes) have been switched out to Microsoft Security Essentials, which, much to my amazement, has become well respected by this author.

If money is a real concern, F-Protect is the better buy, and will do very well in all but the most viral of environments. The same is true if resources are dire. In the same case, Mirosoft Security Essentials must be a consideration

If you have but one machine, by all means, go with Nod32.

Oh, and those infected machines... What were they running most often this year? Symantec, hands down... Followed closest by McAfee and PC-Cillin.

As far as FREE anti-vurus programs are concerned:

AVG free has fallen from grace, as far as I am concerned - It has been getting very system-heavy (fat) for some time, and I am now getting many machines across my bench which have AVG onboard.... And like most AVs I dislike, these machines don't even know they are infected... So fat AND stupid puts AVG out of the running along with Avast (which I have always found to be less than advertised).

BitDefender Free is still a favorite of mine, but since it offers no realtime protection (it is a manual scanner only), I don't consider it to be a worthy choice for a front line product. It is, however, an excellent backup scanner in any event, whose detection rates are very good.

And I still like AntiVir Personal, which is a very worthy AV, but does not offer e-mail protection - That isn't a problem for some folks though, who only have webmail accounts. So if one only has a Yahoo, MSN (Live or Hotmail), or GMail account, or if one only accesses email through a web browser interface (like SquirrelMail, etc) AntiVir is a worthy consideration.

But by far and away, it is Microsoft Security Essentials that is destined to become ubiquitous, and is my hands-down pick for freeware anti-virus.
One must have a legal, activated/validated Windows (XP Home/Pro 32bit, Vista 32/64bit, or Seven 32/64bit) operating system in order to qualify for this free download, but under those conditions, MSE is the one to have, bar none. Otherwise, for folks who cannot use MSE, AntiVir would be the choice to use.

And finally, a short note with regard to anti-spyware:

This year, Malwarebytes has tipped the scale as the most effective of this group. It has become a phenomenon in it's own right.

I install Spybot Search and Destroy on every box as well - While it does not detect everything, what it does detect it is very good at, and it does detect some that no other product can. It is alo very exact in it's removal procedures - If it thinks it can kill it, it DOES kill it... Something I have against Malwarebytes in some rare cases. It's passive immunization system and extensive tools in advanced mode make it irreplaceable on any system.

And as an alternative to Malwarebytes, especially on machines with low resources and/or legacy operating systems, SuperAntiSpyware is still a great pick.

So as far as anti-spyware goes: Spybot Search and Destroy, and EITHER Malwarebytes OR SuperAntiSpyware.

I am still supporting Lavasoft's Adaware, but in a discontinuing fashion. It is growing heavy (again), and if one has the resources to run Adaware, one might as well use Malwarebytes, which is a bit lighter, and certainly more effective. I am changing my client systems out to Malwarebytes as they come in.

::TFG