211–220 of 388 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An extraordinary amount of Cryptolocker outbreaks were due to .docx files containing macros. Yes, it has a default behaviour of "prompt to execute macros", but it happily shows the advice in the malicious document to "please click yes at this prompt to get a free iPhone", at which point the majority of users click "yes".
.docx files can't contain macros
Mikko Hyppönen, famous for his TED talk, is from F-Secure https://www.ted.com/talks/mikko_hypponen_fighting_viruses_de...
While many AV companies are really bad, AV per say is still an extra layer of security. Telling people to remove a layer of security is bad advice. There's a problem though and if I knew how to solve it I'd be rich!
This is my advice to everyone I know that gets a new Windows PC. Windows 10's built-in protection is more than adequate, and catches the majority of bad software - anything more is unnecessary, and many of the AV vendors are predatory.
It sucks that you cannot reset your Windows to MS-Vendor settings. For example if you get some Acer laptop and reset it using windows built-in functionality it'll still reset it with all the bloatware - including AV.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't most browsers have hooks for AV (and other plugins) to get into web traffic without having to mess with TLS?
No, I don't think so and if it does, please tell me which browser does it so I can keep away from it, because that defeats the purpose of TLS. Either way, Bitdefender installs their own root certificate and generates their own for google.com. I've got proof if you want.
AVs generally run with complete permissions, and can do everything up to and including injecting their own code inside your browser's running process. Providing them with an API doesn't weaken the security, it just reduces the chances they'll screw the browser up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't most browsers have hooks for AV (and other plugins) to get into web traffic without having to mess with TLS?
No, I don't think so and if it does, please tell me which browser does it so I can keep away from it, because that defeats the purpose of TLS. Either way, Bitdefender installs their own root certificate and generates their own for google.com. I've got proof if you want.
As someone who develops a (PyQt-based) desktop app [1], I can confirm this: My app has so far falsely been put into quarantine by Avira and McAffee. It's a pain... [1]: https://fman.io
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>and their behavior has been acceptable compared with that of others like Facebook. If you have the time, would you mind expanding on why you consider Google's behavior better than Facebook's? I find myself very wary of FB but much less so of Google, but I can't really explain why.
You're just biased, because Facebook has way more potential for doing you harm and has used your data against your interests already. Facebook manipulates the emotions of its users: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/06/28/facebook-... MasterCard to access Facebook user data in order to make you spend more: http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/business-it/mastercard-to-ac... Facebook ads use your face for free:…
Ok, disclaimer first: I've previously worked at Kaspersky Lab (incident response division). Now, I want to say that many of the incidents that we have investigated, would have been prevented by anti-virus software (in many cases AV software was deliberately disabled by user). And I'm talking about incidents that resulted in million-dollar thefts - not just cases of some user getting cryptolocker on their home compute…
Any AV software is better than having none but that's not the point of the article. It specifically recommends Microsoft's AV and to stay clear of all the others. I'm sure it's hard on all the AV vendors out there but with Microsoft Essentials and Windows Defender I don't see the need for a third party AV.
Google Safe Browsing.
Seriously.
Anything you download is already checked with Google, why waste CPU cycles on checking it again locally?