Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

robert.ocallahan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 388 posts

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#251

Post by ysavir »

kofejnik wrote: post #225
illys wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I still have a problem when all my "actual searches" becomes someone else's "most valuable property". Of course there are some other less intrusive search engines (DuckDuckGo, maybe Qwant), but unfortunately they still are less efficient than Google for fine or rare searches.

you are not paying for search service; ergo, your searches are the product and your search results are but a byproduct of that product

Ehhhhhh I'm paying for it by viewing the sponsored (and non-sponsored) ads.

Any tracking that isn't announced to the user is not a cost, but is espionage.

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#252

Post by [deleted] »

kofejnik wrote: post #225
illys wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I still have a problem when all my "actual searches" becomes someone else's "most valuable property". Of course there are some other less intrusive search engines (DuckDuckGo, maybe Qwant), but unfortunately they still are less efficient than Google for fine or rare searches.

you are not paying for search service; ergo, your searches are the product and your search results are but a byproduct of that product

[deleted]

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#253

Post by pjmlp »

divanvisagie wrote: post #247
pjmlp wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they only became a business due to the people that were pirating software in the 80's. Thanks to the increase of virus across MS-DOS, Atari, Acorn, Amiga and Mac operating systems, specially on boot sector floppies, the general public learned that anti-virus were required software to always have installed.

So are you saying that if people didn't pirate stuff the viruses would not have spread? Presumably because they would not be using floppies as much?

Yes, it was the spread of pirated software, which crackers usually filled with virus "just for fun", alongside the lack of protection mechanism in the desktop OSes that gave rise to virus.

Thus making anti-virus a software package, that most home users would buy, in my home country even that was usually pirated.

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#254

Post by __jal »

bad_user wrote: post #196
illys wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I still have a problem when all my "actual searches" becomes someone else's "most valuable property". Of course there are some other less intrusive search engines (DuckDuckGo, maybe Qwant), but unfortunately they still are less efficient than Google for fine or rare searches.

Well, I have a problem with that too, but then I'm talking about the average user, which is never going to install Tor in order to connect to DuckDuckGo. And to tell you the truth, I don't trust DuckDuckGo that much either, as they can always turn around and start collecting data without me knowing it. But for us, the technically inclined and privacy aware, there are always solutions. But for the average user, until…

I see a distinct difference between DDG and Google.

We know Google does what it does. DDG's reason for existence is predicated on not doing so.

If DDG were found to be lying, I'd guess >80% of its customer base would evaporate overnight. It would mean destroying many years of branding, trust and relatively difficult cultivation of user browser defaults.

But that's worth gaming out - what would make it worth it to light all that on fire? About the only thing I can think of is a Lavabit-style conundrum, wherein our intelligence-overlords threaten someone's freedom. So, absolutely could happen, absolutely would come out.

So that's why I trust DDG to be less forthcoming with their logs.

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#255

Post by floatboth »

tootie wrote: post #245
floatboth wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't install pirated apps from shady sources, you absolutely do not need AV on your Android device.

My android seems to have some sneeky adware on it and I've never installed anything not for the Google or Amazon stores or written myself.

Of course, you have to look at what you're downloading from the stores, Google Play isn't aggressively pre-moderated like the Apple App Store. Still, apps are sandboxed and can't do really evil shit without special permissions. Make sure these random apps don't request the "draw over other apps" one.

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#256

Post by tptacek »

In case you're wondering, this is basically the advice that most security people will give you as well, if you exclude "antivirus people" (who are really off in their own weird world), all of whom will say "use our company's product first, but no matter what you do, don't use Microsoft's".

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#257

Post by the_af »

slgeorge wrote: post #240
edejong wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ubuntu unity sells your searches in the desktop environment by default

No Ubuntu doesn't , and nor has it every done. It connects on-line and off-line searches, so it shows you the result in on-line locations. The underlying assumption was that users increasingly see on-line and off-line content as all part of the same world ("their content"). The commercial aspect was that it connected to places like Amazon. It made money for Canonical by using affiliate links if the user chose to make…

I agree it's not the same as collecting user history and selling it to third parties. However, it's still against the expectations of most users of FOSS. These things, if they must be there at all, must absolutely be opt-in, never opt-out. Canonical deserved the backlash.

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#258

Post by nerdponx »

soylentcola wrote: post #241
bad_user wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Google collects your searches. They don't sell your searches, they sell whatever they infer from your searches (your compiled and quite vague profile and I know, because I interacted with their AdSense platform), because they'd be stupid to sell your actual searches, since that's their most valuable property. Does anybody else know your search history? Besides the NSA, whom I assume have access to all US-ho…

It often irks me when people say things like "Google sells all of your data to advertisers and you are the product!" Not because there are no potential issues to discuss around ad-funded free services and data aggregation, but more because it's like clickbait (in that it oversimplifies a complex issue for emotional effect and makes discussion of actual issues more difficult). Using algorithms to build a general profi…

You're right, Google hoards your data, instead of selling it. They are the ones buying.

That's not the point. The point is there is a dark market trade in your personal identifying data and metadata, with the ultimate goal of knowing everything about you. The more they know about you, the better they can advertise to you.

Advertisements on the Internet are bought and sold algorithmically on high speed marketplaces. Omniscience leads to better decisions in this environment. Therefore your data is precious to whomever owns it.

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#259

Post by nashashmi »

gtirloni wrote: post #117
franciscop wrote: post #52

I will consider this. I " maintain " my relatives computers which is basically to install an anti-virus and adblock. They still get those sketchy messages from friends from time to time though, which is the main reason that I keep them with an AV. Is this correct? Does AV improve security for people who cannot differentiate between a .pdf and an .exe? Personally I don't use an AV, I am a bit paranoid and technical co…

I don't use an AV either, but I'm very careful with the things I download (and I don't download new stuff very often). My relatives, on the other hand, will click just about anything that says "click me" (even more if it says they will win a prize or something). Windows Defender is great and it's enough for me but my relatives need something that cover more areas. Any way you can think of tricking them, they will fal…

My love for Windows Defender came when it was called Giant Anti-Spyware (founded by Oz). It managed to find 4 pieces of spyware on my computer, and I consider myself technically competent enough to clean spyware manually.

When I ran the same software on another computer, it managed to find 3284 pieces of malware. And to think I was planning on doing it manually, eh eh. (It had an antispyware software that did nothing.)

Eventually, Giant went mainstream and malware became smarter to work around it. At which point, MBAM came to the rescue. My next favorite anti-malware.

Re: Avoid Non-Microsoft Antivirus Software

#260

Post by hmage »

floatboth wrote: post #226
karlb wrote: post #183

Does this apply to Macs? I know that many Mac users don't use anti-virus. Are they right not to?

If you don't download apps from random shady sources, you don't really need AV. Recent versions of macOS default to only allowing apps from the App Store.

> Recent versions of macOS default to only allowing apps from the App Store.

That's incorrect, with the introduction of Gatekeeper the default setting for it was to allow only signed apps — all app store apps are signed, but developer can sign apps outside of app store. The default setting didn't change since then.

Post reply on HN