Safe`n`Sec 2009 + Antivirus Dr. WEBComments on:

By: Bhgat

Bhgat — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:09:28 +0000

better blog for antivirus reviews is http://bestfreeantivirus4u.blogspot.com

By: Fubar

Fubar — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:11:09 +0000

I wasn't going to bother to comment but most of the comments are just silly, as on most security product giveaways. As to the endless nonsense about an unknown startup deserving attention, that's just the thing, this isn't a new product, and the complete lack of reviews by any major review sites indicates it should be avoided. Then there's the same plagiarized, useless, half-decade old review as last time. #41, prober, that's the review linked by the developer. Read it more carefully. Safe'n'Sec has an enormous false-positive rate, only Emsi products are worse, basically flagging everything as malware (some people here will think that's great, "Oh, look at how much malware it detects!"). Anti-Malware Test Lab is crap, and it should be immediately obvious to you that it's crap. AV-Comparatives tests relatively few products. Virus Bulletin has their own VB100 test (you'll need to create a free account). The Matousec Proactive Security Challenge is primarily leak tests. Frankly, I'm getting annoyed with Matousec. Vista is a completely different security environment from XP, all of the security products had to be completely rewritten for it, but they don't test on Vista. Yet again, they just published a new review of Agnitum Outpost Security Suite Pro 2009 using an old version (the current version has an updated antivirus engine, among other things). I think Wilder's is mostly crap. I'm not going to get into the endless issues regarding testing security products. While signatures are nice if they positively identify malware without false-positives (the VB100 awards require 100% detection of all in-the-wild viruses with zero false-positives), the other features of a security suite will still catch other malware, but you do have to be able to interpret the security prompts. #87, #92, Damian Spooner, according to your test, Safe'n'Sec detected 301 out of 500 malware samples, and Kaspersky detected 460. Agnitum Outpost Security Suite detected 491 (the other 9 should be detected by the other security mechanisms when they are installed/executed). Multiple realtime scanners of the same type nearly always interfere with each other. You can't exclude them from each other, that only excludes folders, the problem is the way that they hook into each other. Conflicts may not be at all obvious, and either generate false positives or compromise your security, or both.

By: Spiritwolf

Spiritwolf — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 06:14:33 +0000

I think this giveaway takes longer to install than any app I’ve ever seen before!

By: pcnmacguy

pcnmacguy — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 06:05:47 +0000

I just have to comment that the major “commercial” AV appz are the very ones that a malitious programmer is trying to defeat. If the world of business uses, say, Norton… then to do the most damage and make a name for my virus I will work very hard to get past the main manufacturers, but a less used application is safer. This is why there are much less virus programs written to damage Mac’s OS. If the worlds financial institutions are using Windows, then by attacking other opperating systems is far less damaging. The other fact I must mention is that the programs written and maintained by those in Europe are privy to a new virus as they have already concluded their day of business before we in America have even had our morning coffee, meaning that they have a chance to come up with new virus definitions that fit the new attacking program and send a fix before we even are on the internet checking our morning email.

I use Avast or AVG on my machines and am very happy with the results compared to Norton. I had several attacks that shut Norton down and the free applications have served me better. I will refrain from comment on Safe and Secure as I have not had a chance to test it at this time. NO RATING FROM ME!

By: Spiritwolf

Spiritwolf — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 06:05:11 +0000

Message when I started to run installation…Warning Safe & Sec can be installed on pc running windows xp spe3 or Vista sp1, continue anyway?

What does this mean? If it can be installed on sp3 xp or vista sp1, what is the purpose of this weird warning message

By: gmon

gmon — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 05:05:36 +0000

I decided to try this on my eee 1000HE running XP Home sp3. No problem with installation or activation. 32 minutes to scan my system using automatic setup, and so far the program has blocked no processes or even popped up any warnings on known bad sites; it does pop up a notification about every file being accessed during a program installation, but the popups are completely useless since they have no options. Seems the learning mode simply watches what you are doing and learns to let you do it.

The antivirus leaves very much to be desired – very bare bones, no context menu scan and no information, contrary to what is noted in the help file. After setting what should have been the default settings in the scan module, I chose to scan system memory, boot sectors and one file that I know is always detected as a false positive in other av programs. Safe ‘n Sec detected a hidden process and the one false positive file, but I could get no information from the program as to what the hidden process was or what the detected virus was, so Safe ‘n Sec is now learning all about the recycle bin.

By: GamefreQ

GamefreQ — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:52:17 +0000

I have uninstalled after the Automatic Setup failed on Windows Vista Home Premium…

By: GamefreQ

GamefreQ — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:47:45 +0000

Hawk, This must be a false positive considering that a respected company will usually not infect their security applications.

By: Hawk

Hawk — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:41:14 +0000

I just tried to install this safe n sec 2009 and zemanna antilogger popped up a warning saying this software was trying to install a keylogger.

I have installed a lot of antivirus products on this machine and zemanna has never warned about any of them installing a keylogger. Please be careful!

Hawk

By: GamefreQ

GamefreQ — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:22:29 +0000

Well I’ve given the help file a good read and it seems like decent software. Knows what its talking about. I’ll test it with some simple test viruses to see how it responds.