Best virus scanner and malware detector?

[DaveBB]

I have Windows 7 on my gaming computer and Windows 10 on my other computer.  What virus scanner and malware detector (preferably free) do you all recommend? 

[Bizman]

Eset Nod32 has been told to have the smallest footprint on games. However, it's not free.

The free ones tend to be more or less intrusive so at least put AH on their exclusions lists. For Win10 the built-in Defender might be enough according to some experts.

If you go the paid route, don't get Norton or McAfee since they're among the worst game stoppers in the market.

[Shuffler]

On Win 7 I ran AVG and Malwarebytes. Both paid and inexpensive. On Win 10 I run the on board Defender and Malwarebytes.

Seems to work fine.

[zack1234]

Best anti virus, dont go on dodgy sites

[Vulcan]

Best anti virus, dont go on dodgy sites

^ rubbish.

The bad news is the best virus scanner is not going to be free.

There are currently two types of virus scanners on the market, traditional AV (primarily signature based) - and Next Generation AV (AI/Machine Learning based). Ideally you want a combo of the two.

Signature based is what all your traditional AV uses. And as far as effectiveness goes it's pretty meh these days. I work for a security company (we do not MAKE desktop AV), and as part of our solution we have what you could call NGAV running behind signature AV. In August we detected 26000 new malware strands that got past 62 of the top Antivirus engines (signature based). But at the end of the day you want both.

I would recommend looking at this:  https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/avc_mrg_biz_2016_nextgen_en.pdf

Last year I ran a combo of MS AV (which is crap tbh) for signatures and Cylance (free from work). This year I almost brought Webroot, but got some 'sample' licenses for another product (I won't mention names as I not convinced enough to put it on my recommended list).

[BowHTR]

ESET and Malwarebytes for me.

[Vulcan]

ESET and Malwarebytes for me.

I have malwarebytes on a PC, it misses all the new stuff. Same goes for Eset.

Let me quantify this, we run 62 of the major AV clients - and they miss a minimum of 800 malware samples per day.

[Vraciu]

What about that PCMatic thing?   That Star Trek spokesman is really convincing!

[TequilaChaser]

I have malwarebytes on a PC, it misses all the new stuff. Same goes for Eset.

Let me quantify this, we run 62 of the major AV clients - and they miss a minimum of 800 malware samples per day.

I use ESET Smart Security and Malwarebytes also, I use malwarebytes as  secondary checking if I think something may have gotten through... along with using good habits in using the internet and precautions , plus personal settings for web Browsers etc..

Vulcan is spot on, that every AV out there will miss most new stuff, simply because there are people out there that makes it their mission to create havoc by introducing new viruses/root kits/trojans, etc..... and until they are found, acknowledged and a fix or definition is written and updated  regularly for a person's AV, that a person runs on their own computer, ..... they are open to getting infected.....

most people just jump on the interwebs and don't think twice about what ad link, or picture, or whatever that they are clicking on.... they are nieve and uneducated about the pitfalls that are surrounding them

TC

[Vulcan]

Vulcan is spot on, that every AV out there will miss most new stuff, simply because there are people out there that makes it their mission to create havoc by introducing new viruses/root kits/trojans, etc..... and until they are found, acknowledged and a fix or definition is written and updated  regularly for a person's AV, that a person runs on their own computer, ..... they are open to getting infected.....

The new Next Gen AV uses other methods to detect malware and does it very well. My recommendation is Next Gen AV + and old school signature based scanner (like the free MS one) is a good mix/balance. The only challenge is the consumer is limit in choice (most NGAV is not interested in the consumer market).

[ghi]

I used Karpersky years ago, at one point was better Norton, this week was banned in US, sends your files straight to mother Russia /KGB.

"U.S. moves to ban Kaspersky software in federal agencies amid concerns of Russian espionage"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-to-ban-use-of-kaspersky-software-in-federal-agencies-amid-concerns-of-russian-espionage/2017/09/13/36b717d0-989e-11e7-82e4-f1076f6d6152_story.html?utm_term=.97851cfc5c47

[Bizman]

Let me quantify this, we run 62 of the major AV clients - and they miss a minimum of 800 malware samples per day.

Numbers like that have always puzzled me. Not only your statistics, but also the marketing hype of AV companies: "Last week we stopped umpteen gazillion attacks". To me that sounds like most people myself included have our computers filled with malware missed by the AV clients. However, during these 13 years of business my fingers still can count the number of cases where the ISP has told to get rid of viruses or else they cut the wire. And that number includes a few infected modems.

So my question is, what is the total mass of data of which you find the 800 missed malware samples plus those that are caught (which I suppose is a bigger number)? And how does that correlate to an average home user? Not to mention those who only use the Internet for banking and reading the leading tabloid sites? If I told about such numbers to my customers they'd sell their computers for fear of losing all their savings to Harry the Hacker.

I'm not saying that the threat isn't real. The question is, how potential the risk is if you're cautious and have an up-to-date AV shield against known threats.

[Maverick]

I run win 7 as well. I have CCleaner and SUPERantispyware. Both are free and both seem to be doing a pretty good job. No issues and this system has been running for almost 4 years now.

Of course as soon as I posted this. the very next site dropped this little bombshell. https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/18/avast-reckons-ccleaner-malware-infected-2-27m-users/   

I downloaded the newest version immediately but did not have the version that was hacked according to the article.

[Bizman]

Maverick, you do know CCleaner is not an anti-malware product, don't you. Just for clarification, I've met people who believe it cleans all crap including viruses.

[Vulcan]

So my question is, what is the total mass of data of which you find the 800 missed malware samples plus those that are caught (which I suppose is a bigger number)? And how does that correlate to an average home user? Not to mention those who only use the Internet for banking and reading the leading tabloid sites? If I told about such numbers to my customers they'd sell their computers for fear of losing all their savings to Harry the Hacker.

Good question. So here is how it works...

The system is a cloud based malware protection platform, it operates on edge devices (firewalls and antispam systems). Files of interest are submitted (executables, documents etc). As a file is received a signature based pre-filter similar to VirusTotal runs over it (that's your 62 scanners). If malware is detected we stop there. Just a note these scanners are there to make the whole system more efficient, not as a way of measuring how good they are.

If the file comes out of that with no hits it is then submitted to 3 sandbox engines (in parallel). At the pre-filter stage we also check to see if we've seen this file before (ie had a sandbox hit earlier in the day). After the sandbox makes a decision we deliver a verdict back to the client. If a hit is found then the malware sample goes into processing to also generate a signature (to allow faster detection at the edge).

So the bit I am saying we see at least 800 new malware strands is when the sandbox engines pick something up. Those are 800 unique samples that just got past your major AV vendors. In August we hit 26000 total. Some AV vendors take days - weeks to get these signatures out, so 800 malware samples a day you are vulnerable might actually be 5 days worth (so 4000 or more you are currently vulnerable too).

End result is we had a signature in place for Wannacry 3 weeks before the big Wannacry hit. We had seen small (maybe test) samples of the malware the month before the big attack.

Things are bleak for the average home user. We're not interested in them, our product is priced a bit out of their range (but within small business) as are many leading security products.