Uninstall antivirus software - vendors are terrible

#5387604 Posted on: 02/01/2017 11:51 PM

---

You can stop a lot of the crap getting on your pc with a custom hostfile and a adblocker for your browser and common sense.

#5387693 Posted on: 02/02/2017 04:51 AM

---

by the way, linux nowadays has just as many vulnerabilities as windows 7 (number wise)

but still, windows 7 has way less vulnerabilities than windows 10.
4 times less in whole 2016 incl. january 2017, 135 (win7) vs 397 (win10)
1 : 13 in january 2017 (for people who say this ratio would actually be equalized lately... it is NOT...)

source: https://web.nvd.nist.gov
It's a bit more complicated than that with Linux. Do they mean the kernel? Do they mean another piece of software? Do holes in distros like Ubuntu count as separate to holes in the packages these distros are made of? Was the kernel hardened? Did the exploit work with SELinux on? A rolling release like Arch will protect you from 99% of the stuff out there, and the way things run under Linux (you have to explicitly enable the execution of something and then run it), makes any kind of "normal" virus almost impossible to run. Unlike versions of Windows prior to 10, a virus can't install a kernel level driver either in Linux. It's an explicitly contained by design environment. That just makes it harder, though, not impossible.

It's nice that so many people here are experts and have never had a virus. Many people are not experts, and have terrible security practices. I still see other peoples' machines with viruses regularly. To suggest that these users are safer without AV is dangerous advice in my opinion.

Who is the source of this? A guy that started a flame thread to "shame" Avast into modifying their software, and admitted it was wrong to do so? Now that he is "free" he posts another rant, and I'm supposed to take this seriously?.

It's common sense really. He doesn't say that you're not supposed to use an antivirus. He says that all antivirus with the exception of the Microsoft one, have so bad platform implementations that they themselves are an attack vector. And he's completely right. For them to work, they need kernel-level system access, and injecting DLL into browser executables means breaking the sandbox, which is dangerous and retarded.

The guy starts by complaining about the way Avast interacts with Firefox(dll injection). Then he seems to ignore the simple solution to his complaint, and continues to point fingers after being informed that his complaint was already being addressed by Avast.

"The correct alternative would be for us to expose an API that an extension can hook into to examine scripts before we run them." - Brian Zbarsky

"We are really sensitive to public shaming of partners, especially the ones we work closely with and in this case, they were already working on a fix. This really impacts our relationship w/partners" - Erica Josted

"I accept this thread was a bad idea and I apologize for my error of
judgement." - Robert O'Callahan
This is just PR damage control. Injections of libraries into the browser sandbox and "resolving it with partners" is the exact reason why these products are utter sh*t. Security is time sensitive and users trust with kernel level access, people who seriously thought that messing with a browser's sandbox is somehow ok.

I think you missed his point. Did you have a valid counterpoint, or just reflexive insults? Octopuss may not have expressed himself very clearly, but I didn't see him throwing insults at other members. Normally I find your posts insightful. I've found that if someone can't express him/her self without using insults to try to reinforce his/her "logic" then said "logic" is probably flawed.
He didn't express any rational thought. His post was the definition of sh*tposting and he did it not only once, but twice. His style of reply is what leads places of actual conversation between people into sh*ty ecochambers where everyone repeats what they want to hear, with no regard to fact, research, or experience. You can tell that by the fact of his ignore list, perfectly tailored to keep him in his happy place, with his happy thoughts.

#5388070 Posted on: 02/03/2017 12:43 AM

---

lol.. gonna pass on all the EXPERTS here Excuse me just passing through..

No one is stocking you, targeting you. The hits on that FIREWALL..OMG the IP is from CHINA! Who are you? Yeah. Are some giants company's trying to get MASS info sure. Where you go what you look at .. blah blah blah.

Viruses are out there duh. WHERE are you going WHAT are you download. And PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STOP clicking on EMAIL LINKS.

This is just like people talking about "proxy/vpn (starts where your at)". 95+% don't have the money it takes nor a clue where to even BUY this stuff. Lost so many right there. You know the "don't keep records" and look.. TRACK ME says I am somewhere else.. NO ONE can find me! Run with that.

So this BLOG.. if you asked me and you didnt..has some great advice yet.. you will always need an antivirus. Some of the cheapest and free ones that have no real name.. are the best. Sad but so true.

This really should say it all.. "an Ex-Mozilla developer states in his blog"

#5388073 Posted on: 02/03/2017 12:50 AM

---

@MaxBlade
lol are you Christopher Walken?

#5388078 Posted on: 02/03/2017 01:07 AM

---

I've been switching between Avira, AVG, and Avast for years because all 3 of them at any given point become far too useless and invasive. They usually back down for a second, then the cycle repeats.

But recently AVG and Avast have been off the scale detecting something like 50 files I want to keep as "threats" and won't STFU no matter what along with MULTIPLE daily pop-up advertisements. I've switched to Avira for now but right after installation I got 3 popups within 10 minutes to buy their garbage, luckily they seem to have a "never show again" option unlike AVG and Avast.

That and I looked through this site: https://www.av-comparatives.org/

Seems of the 3 crapfest AVs I've been switching between Avira is currently the least offensive as far as false positives go. And it was right, none of my files are detected as threats with Avira.

I've always considered using Kaspersky, but no matter what version of it I use in what decade, it always crashes when deep scanning my archive of files. Literally across different decades across multiple different computers, always the same result.