I come to find out that Many Downloads from CNET do contains Adware.
If any one here do download any file from CNET Download.
Please do a scan via VIRUSTOTAL.com
I am suggesting to use Malwarebytes,Superantispyware, ESET, AVIRA,DR Web for CureIT and DrWEB for Light Mac Antivirus to detect it.
I'm not sure if Adware Lavasoft detects it.
Some of the junk that Cnet hopes you install are shown here;
These include Browser hijackers that are hard to remove and Cnet hopes that users install these programs by default.
However, this Adware is legal; it is not spyware/a virus/a trojan but a Potentially Unwanted Program (PUP).
But AV vendors in some cases cannot legally detect and remove other vendors legal PUPs, so none of the software that Cnet hopes that you download is illegal malware.
But as shown above, Malwarebytes can ride to the rescue again.
same with http://www.softonic.com/ it's full of crap, beware and remeber to never use the "default" install, always choose "custom" and read before clicking !
I think more AV companies need to take stuff like this seriously. Family members of mine don't really get trojans or other malware, they get toolbars, dozens of them taking over their browsers. One of the reasons I don't recommend F-Secure to them is because the PUA detection is so poor. Even though I use F-Secure myself, I end up installing ESET on their machines because they handle PUA/PUP very well, and I'm not running over there every couple of days to uninstall toolbars.
those are PUP (potentially unwanted programs) and are usually harmless (just a PIA), first: the user has to use what's between his ears, must not click ok on any crap he downloads...
second: respectable and well thought AV programs must raise to the level of Malwarebyte, ESET is not so good !
Malwarebytes already not so best....
NOD32 already some kind of better in that situations (if we talk about PUPs/Related and some kind of "level" for all protection).
First - it's always better, because if need to use all-time - Nod32 will be better, than Malwarebytes (it's logical, of course);
But for one-time scan - Nod32 better too.
Nod32 better detected, better clean..... And it's can be just Online Scanner (not full installation like with Malwarebytes, especially when it's already new version.. which some kind of strange);
MBAM better in some kind of "cleaning" for empty keys and other... but... it's not so critical for protection. And already that thing... able to do by any other software too.
Rootkits or other.... I not sure.. that current MBAM can be potentially always better, than other.
Litlte edited: here I also mean.. a lot of "false-positive" with MBAM; Indeed.. it's probably most part of detection will be just false-positive.. Or not really helpful for protection - just cleaning, which can to do... by CCleaner, for example. :)
Second - you are right that... PUP usually harmless :) But for users... it's anyway... a trouble. And users, of course, should be more carefull with using network/web.
Here just one good - totallly malicious "PUPs" are detected by F-Secure.
Malwarebyte is probably not the paragon, I agree with you, but as a second layer protection tool for regular checks it will suit the needs of the average user.
F-Secure is excellent, I would go for F-Secure plus a weekly check with MBAM and, most of all the use of what is between my ears :) I used Kaspersky, then ESET, Norton for long periods of time and found no efficiency gap between them.
Vipre, which I'm now beta testing, is promising and I wiould have difficulty to choose between it and F-Secure.
Maybe... if talk about second layer (but for me - MBAM - some kind of strange software for regular using - here I not mean just check... Certainly for regular using with premium-version, for example; But just like scanner it's, of course, not bad maybe). Also about previous versions of MBAM.. it was dangerous to have installed MBAM in system :) Because it was so vulnerable for "infection" and already MBAM-installation will be "broken" or just "harmful". Anyway.. user should to download/install it like "clean" installation for normally work of features.
In previous words (original words) about Nod32 was.. just like "one layer" in system. And probably it's logical, when have to "require" for protection against PUPs and also other "high"-level-protection-status;
About other protection-software... they all can not be better, than F-Secure :)
Just some of them can be good in PUPs-detection (for example) - and here good example - Nod32.
Another.. just if firewall.. or some kind of other "hard to use"-features for users (or other reasons for "worry-full")...
Also, of course, different in "user-style". :) It's can be different... and it's can be most important for choose protection-software.
/little edited/: of course, if user can to "trust" for current company :) It's probably more important, than other points.
This topic has been closed due to inactivity. If you would like to discuss this topic further, please start a new post.
You can reference this topic in your post by adding this link:
Visit the Community
Check our Forums or How-to & FAQs for advice or answers
View User Guides
Refer to our getting started guides and product manuals
Talk to our Support and get answers to your questions