|
| |
|
|
DebSpecs
Posts: 101
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: NY
Status: offline
 |
recent McAfee troubles - 8/7/2007 17:46:31
Has anyone had recent troubles connecting to the internet? Do you use McAfee?
I could not believe my ears and eyes, but apparantly one of their automatic updates completely froze the computers ability to get online. Their software alert said i needed to "purchase" an update, but only when I called did an automated phone message inform me that I needed to completely uninstall then reinstall the downloaded software.
Yes, i can get online now, but since this happened, I have also been getting an unbelievable amount of ad pop-ups that completely ruin my surfing experience.
Has anyone had a similair experience?
|
|
|
|
BobbyDouglas
Posts: 5431
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/7/2007 18:34:00
If the popups happen on pages that normally didn't have popups, and they are for ads about porn and viagra, then it sounds like you might have received a virus or spyware with the popups.
If the problem is that your popup blocker isn't working now, then it might not be a virus.
Can you confirm which one it is?
Not that you have to at this point, but if you're interested in switching AV, I can save you quite a bit on a Kaspersky AV and Kaspersky KIS license.
_____________________________
Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge
| |
|
|
|
DebSpecs
Posts: 101
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: NY
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/8/2007 12:29:46
It's not porn or viagra. The pop ups are actually sometimes for well known companies like LL Bean. But McAfee finally sent me an email. The last operation they had me do to correct their screwing up my computer apparantly wasn't good enough. I have to go to their website and tinker some more.
Aye. As soon as my subscription with them is up, I very well may take you up on your offer. Did Kaspersky ever give you automatic updates that completely screwed up your browsing abilities?
:)Falala
| |
|
|
|
darsh999
Posts: 1
Joined: 8/11/2007
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/11/2007 15:01:30
i stopped using Mc cafe a long ago ... its all crap !!
| |
|
|
|
TJolly
Posts: 92
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: Cheshire, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/12/2007 7:12:01
Hello DebSpecs
Why don't you just use AVG free
| |
|
|
|
DebSpecs
Posts: 101
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: NY
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/13/2007 11:56:28
McAfee is doody, alright! I finally figured out that they allowed non-verified plug ins to my IE. They wouldn't tell me this on the phone, i had to figure out myself. I'm done complaining- thank you so much for the alternative virus protection. This forum rocks!
| |
|
|
|
BobbyDouglas
Posts: 5431
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/13/2007 12:20:44
quote:
ORIGINAL: TJolly
Why don't you just use AVG free
- Tests show that AVG Free has horrible detection rates compared to low cost paid software.
_____________________________
Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge
| |
|
|
|
DebSpecs
Posts: 101
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: NY
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/13/2007 15:00:22
I'm always a little skeptical about "free" stuff when it comes to my computer. Tv's, clothes, guitar pedals- i'll take it! But software---ehhhhhh.
| |
|
|
|
TJolly
Posts: 92
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: Cheshire, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/14/2007 5:57:49
Bobby
You are referring to the Professional edition in the testing process. AVG Free has over 50 million satisfied customers. AVG Free is soley an anti-virus program.
The tests you refer to reflect a snapshot in time and does not reflect present performance.
AVG is 100% in detecting known virus's. The software updates itself on a daily basis. It is not a resource hog.
All av software is restricted in detecting any new virus. The vendors are unable to update databases if they are unaware of any new virus that has been released and therefore that particular av program ie Kaspersky, McAfee, Norton etc. are as useless as any other.
AVG Free Edition does not provide adware/spyware removal. However this is not a problem if you also use SpywareBlaster, Windows Defender, Ad-AwareSE and Spybot Search&Destroy. All of these programs are free.
I am the Admin. of a website that deals with computer related problems. We have a section that deals with computers that are infected with a virus. The majority of these infected machines already have well known av software installed that are fully patched. The machines still got infected. Staff on the website are experts in the use of HJT and are very capable of manually cleaning a machine. None of these people have ever criticised AVG Free.
| |
|
|
|
BobbyDouglas
Posts: 5431
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/14/2007 13:29:29
quote:
You are referring to the Professional edition in the testing process.
- I'm talking about the AVG Free version (the paid version is much higher because it includes Ewido, which gives it a significant increase in the detection rate tests).
Lots of people seem to think they are completely protected with the free AV. They are told to ditch the paid software, they install AVG Free and find their computers running much quicker than before. Detection rate tests show AVG Free as having a horrible track record. The software is very light and runs great, but for $20-$30, many people can do much better.
Most of the time, out of the top 10 AV, 50%+ are using the Kaspersky engine.
AVG Free might have significantly changed over the past couple months, so the previous 20 or so tests I've read are now outdated. I'm mainly talking about the overall track record of AVG Free.
quote:
The tests you refer to reflect a snapshot in time and does not reflect present performance.
- Multiple tests throughout the year, show similar results. But you're correct, a test today with AV doesn't mean tomorrow it will have the same results.
quote:
AVG is 100% in detecting known virus's.
- Not even Kaspersky is 100%
_____________________________
Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge
| |
|
|
|
TJolly
Posts: 92
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: Cheshire, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/15/2007 5:43:27
quote:
I'm talking about the AVG Free version (the paid version is much higher because it includes Ewido, which gives it a significant increase in the detection rate tests).
The tests I have read have not included AVG Free.
quote:
Most of the time, out of the top 10 AV, 50%+ are using the Kaspersky engine.
I don't think so.
quote:
- Not even Kaspersky is 100%
All of the av programs are 100 % when it comes to dealing with known virus's.
quote:
"Congratulations to all who are involved in the AVG program. If it continues to work as it has so far, I'll be recommending it to a LOT of my friends. Thank you!"
LR, Naples
"Thank you for your AVG Free program. . . . It has saved my system a few times in the past and today it has once again . . . Thank you, GRISOFT!"
Ed L.
"It has all the essentials, including a resident memory scanner, an e-mail scanner, and scheduled hard disc scans. But what really amazes us is the frequency of the virus definitions and application updates available from GRISOFT."
Maximum PC
AVG Free does exactly what it says on the tin. Why pay for something that does the same job?
| |
|
|
|
BobbyDouglas
Posts: 5431
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/15/2007 19:57:28
quote:
All of the av programs are 100 % when it comes to dealing with known virus's.
- If that was true, then they would all have the same detection rate, which clearly isn't the case.
Back when I was ditching Norton, I tried to find as much info as possible about detection rates (as this was my main concern.. I could live with a little slowness, as long as I had a significant increase in detection rates).
There is a huge difference between the average user's comments saying "[insert product name here] is great, it has caught ALL of the viruses I have ever had, I have never seen an issue with it, it always saves my computer, you should buy it to", and the security professional who takes a set of viruses, and produce the test results of how each AV performed.
Here are some of the old bookmarks I have for when I was looking for results, this one shows AVG with a detection rate of 69% and another one here: AVG Free Edition detected 47 of the 96 samples
I just searched for a more recent test, and here is what one place had to say about AVG Free: The real problem is the program's 83% overall detection rate. This isn't a score to be ashamed of - AVG can be proud of having outshone seven commercial products.
Here's another test of antivirus products for the treatment of active infections Norton AntiVirus 2007 (80%), Kaspersky Anti-Virus 6.0 (70%), AVG Anti-Virus PE 7.5 (30%)
Don't be mislead by the average consumer's comments about AV programs.
_____________________________
Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge
| |
|
|
|
TJolly
Posts: 92
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: Cheshire, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/17/2007 12:36:28
quote:
- If that was true, then they would all have the same detection rate, which clearly isn't the case.
Bobby
If all of the av vendors had their database fully up to date with known virus's then they would detect each one, that's 100%.
quote:
There is a huge difference between the average user's comments saying "[insert product name here] is great, it has caught ALL of the viruses I have ever had, I have never seen an issue with it, it always saves my computer, you should buy it to
So the 50 million plus users of AVG Free have got it all wrong.
quote:
Don't be mislead by the average consumer's comments about AV programs.
I'm not mislead at all. I know a number of Microsoft MVP's who use AVG Free.
The link you provided gives AVG Free 5 Stars out of 6. As I have already said AVG Free is only an anti-virus program. It does not detect spyware etc. Use it with the other free programs I have mentioned and it makes up a nice protective package - All free.
Generally machines become infected through the user visiting inappropriate websites, clicking on links and downloading from sites that allow the illegal copying of music, videos and cracks.
No av software is going to completely protect any machine. So why pay for something when you have the option to use another for free?
You appear to be a Kaspersky fan, great if you like it. I know of others who would say Norton was better.
If a person chooses to pay for their av software then sobeit.
| |
|
|
|
Chrisb1
Posts: 2
Joined: 8/17/2007
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/17/2007 16:15:34
Hi, I'm new here and I've enjoyed reading some of the topics you have.
This one I've found particularly interesting.
My personal background:
I moderate on 2 support forums, I'm an Alliance of Security Analysis Professionals member and I'm a Microsoft MVP. I spend my spare time fixing, building and 'cleaning' computers infected with malware.
I would like to say; I am a fan of AVG Free over all the paid for opponents [including AVG Pro], I've lost count of the number of paid for Anti-virus software I've 'removed' because of corruption[usually around the time of subscription renewal], Norton and McAfee are the two I like the least, both are massively resource hogging.
All Anti-virus databases are always one step behind the latest virus and I've yet to find one that detects everything, so in my opinion a free one is as good as any paid one as long as it's used as part of a layered protection that covers every possible form of 'attack'.
Kaspersky do a free online Anti-virus scan as do some other companies:
http://www.kaspersky.com/virusscanner - [use only with Internet Explorer 6 or higher.]
You can use that periodically without it conflicting with your installed AV [which it is not a substitute for]
No one piece of security software is adequate in this day and age, malware creation has moved on so much since the creation of Windows XP.
Anyway, thats my two pence worth 
Great forum, keep up the good work.
| |
|
|
|
BobbyDouglas
Posts: 5431
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/19/2007 23:48:57
quote:
If all of the av vendors had their database fully up to date with known virus's then they would detect each one, that's 100%.
- If a virus is "known" it doesn't mean the major AV are going to release an update right away. Kaspersky updates every 2 hours, some of the other major AV programs update twice a day. The virus is "known" but virus defs are not always updated that quickly. More importantly, not all of the AV companies use the same methods of findings for new viruses. If Kaspersky finds a new virus, just because they release an update for it, doesn't mean AVG users will be protected.
quote:
The link you provided gives AVG Free 5 Stars out of 6.
- AVG is awesome in everything except for detection rates. What is important to you, might not be important to the person writing the review. To me, I care mostly about detection rates and then system resources. AVG is known to be very very lightweight when it comes to system resources, but it is also known to be one of lesser AV in terms of detection rates. If I had a slow computer, and didn't have $25 for AV software, AVG would be my #1 choice. I've installed it on a couple systems for friends/clients already. Two weeks ago my friend bought a $400 computer from a local seller, that was his budget. Once he bought it, he realized he needed AV, MS Office, etc... I suggested AVG Free for him because of his budget. Yesterday another friend just bought a $1800 laptop. I suggested he go with Kaspersky since he could afford the $25.
quote:
So the 50 million plus users of AVG Free have got it all wrong.
- If they were informed about how poor the detection rates have been (back in 05 AVG had multiple tests with 70% detection rates while the major AV were in the low 90s), I am sure there would be quite a few that wouldn't be using it. Like I said earlier, what is important to you, might not be important to the next guy. You might care most about system resources and features, while the next guy only cares about detection rates.
quote:
No av software is going to completely protect any machine. So why pay for something when you have the option to use another for free?
- Protection, and the piece of mind knowing that I receive an update right away (usually within 2 hours).
quote:
I know of others who would say Norton was better.
- Exactly my point about listening to the average consumer's comments about AV programs.
Chrisb1
quote:
I've yet to find one that detects everything
- Detection rates (even if they don't detect everything), are still very important, right? If these people have paid for Norton/McAfee, don't you think they could afford another $25-$35 for a better AV?
The Kaspersky scan is free, but the online scanner doesn't remove anything, it only detects it.
_____________________________
Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge
| |
|
|
|
TJolly
Posts: 92
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: Cheshire, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/20/2007 6:37:20
quote:
If a virus is "known" it doesn't mean the major AV are going to release an update right away.
Bit of a sweeping statement. If that be true then they shouldn't be in the security business
quote:
Kaspersky updates every 2 hours, some of the other major AV programs update twice a day.
AVG can be set to automatically update on a daily basis.
quote:
More importantly, not all of the AV companies use the same methods of findings for new viruses.
What methods do Kaspersky use? They are the same as any other av company. They wouldn't know about any virus unless they were told about it.
quote:
If Kaspersky finds a new virus, just because they release an update for it, doesn't mean AVG users will be protected.
That is the same vice versa.
quote:
If they were informed about how poor the detection rates have been (back in 05 AVG had multiple tests with 70% detection rates while the major AV were in the low 90s), I am sure there would be quite a few that wouldn't be using it.
We are now in 2007 so that statement is irrelevant. 50 million plus are using it. So, with odds of at least 50000000 - 1 they are wrong and you are the only person who is right.
quote:
- Protection, and the piece of mind knowing that I receive an update right away (usually within 2 hours).
If Kaspersky are unaware of any new virus then you would receive 0 update. Put it this way Bobby I have used McAfee and Norton and they do not impress me at all. I would not pay for the paid version of AVG. If AVG Free ceased to exist then I would look elsewhere.
quote:
Detection rates (even if they don't detect everything), are still very important, right?
How can they be important if they don't detect everything?
quote:
If these people have paid for Norton/McAfee, don't you think they could afford another $25-$35 for a better AV?
No. Why should people have to do that. And just a word of warning. It is not a good idea to have more than one av program running at the same time because they will conflict with each other.
quote:
The Kaspersky scan is free, but the online scanner doesn't remove anything, it only detects it.
You are referring to the removal of spyware. In that case you would use the two free programs, AdAwareSE and Spybot Search&Destroy. Both of these programs are recommended by Microsoft.
Kaspersky offers a 30 day free trial so you would use that to clean your machine of the malicious software etc. that they say they have found.
You are obviously a Kaspersky fan who does not accept any critisism for that particular software. I am not a fan of any particular av program. I use AVG Free because it is free.
If I was going to pay for av software then I would be looking at Nod32.
| |
|
|
|
Nicole
Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/15/2004
From: Nambucca / Kempsey, Australia
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/20/2007 6:57:27
I have Nod32 also and am very happy with it and it updates several times daily.
I also run several free spyware and malware programs, each occasionally find something, mostly it's Ad-Aware that finds the main ones, but that's a different subject entirely.
_____________________________
Nambucca Valley & Kempsey Web Design | NixDesign
Get Netscape Navigator 9
| |
|
|
|
Nicole
Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/15/2004
From: Nambucca / Kempsey, Australia
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/20/2007 8:17:20
I have it running on two computers that don't seem to get the updates at the same time if I have them both on at the same time? There's usually an update overnight though and at least one during the day.
_____________________________
Nambucca Valley & Kempsey Web Design | NixDesign
Get Netscape Navigator 9
| |
|
|
|
BobbyDouglas
Posts: 5431
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/20/2007 12:07:37
quote:
How can they be important if they don't detect everything?
- I look at it in a different way than you. To me this is the most important feature. I understand why you like AVG Free now though.
quote:
We are now in 2007 so that statement is irrelevant.
- Past history... the average consumer is saying the same comments now as they were back then when AVG's detection rate was even worse than it is today. They've gotten better, but their detection rates still don't compare to the big guys.
quote:
You are referring to the removal of spyware.
- No, I was adding to your comment about the online Kaspersky scan - it requires you to install software in order for anything to be removed.
Donkey... Kaspersky's popups can be rather annoying. KIS (the one with the firewall) is a pain in the ass with all of the popups. Even when properly configured, it still gives loads of messages throughout the day.
NOD32 is good, however, I would give Bit Defender a trial first.
_____________________________
Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge
| |
|
|
|
DebSpecs
Posts: 101
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: NY
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/20/2007 13:06:36
What exactly is a scrote? Anyway, that sounds downright creepy that he was storing files on your hard drive. aye!
| |
|
|
|
DebSpecs
Posts: 101
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: NY
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/20/2007 16:23:28
I'm telling you, I was the worse for actually having AV- specifically McAfee. Boogers uploaded "creepy" add-ons to my explorer bar, confessed to faulty "updates", then couldn't fix it.
| |
|
|
|
BobbyDouglas
Posts: 5431
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/20/2007 17:04:55
quote:
Well yes, they are but that would be relevant to how the detection test was done, how do you define a better AV? detection or removal of a virus??
- That's a great point. Even with high detection rates, if you can't remove it, you're still dead in the water. However, if you can detect it, you won't have anything to remove because the AV will detect that something has the virus, and won't let it continue. Also if you can detect it (virus that already exists), but can't remove it, you at least know that something was found and can research other methods for removal. I haven't seen many tests that compare one AV's removal to another, but it would be interesting to see how well the top ones come out (I'm curious to to see how well Norton/McAfee would do).
Very few people are informed about AV when they go out to get the software. Each program is so different from the other, most people don't realize that.
_____________________________
Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge
| |
|
|
|
TJolly
Posts: 92
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: Cheshire, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: recent McAfee troubles - 8/21/2007 4:15:30
quote:
Very few people are informed about AV when they go out to get the software. Each program is so different from the other, most people don't realize that.
That is very true Bobby. The problem with the big boys such as McAfee and Norton is that they come bundled on many manufactured machines and are just accepted as being the correct av software to be used by the purchaser.
Btw I only like AVG Free because it is free. If it didn't exist and Kaspersky Free did then have a guesss which I would choose?
| |
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Printable Version 
