I am using NIS 2005. Can I use Avast along for full system scan?
May I use two antivirus
Yes you can use two Antivirus software. 
Here
If u are asking our permission, yes u may use
But it is not at all advisable, except a few non-conflicting ones like in the above link.
i usually have 3 on my pc. i use bitdefender as the main one, with avast and avg as the others. use 'real-time' monitoring on only one though !
suggest b4 installing your 2nd anti-virus, disable ur 1st one. then install ur 2nd one update/reboot and then disable ur 2nd one. then 'enable' ur 1st one. u can always use ur 2nd one 'on-demand' !
PS : remove the start-ups of ur 2nd virus, and convert their Services from Automatic to Manual. u wont waste any resources that way.
suggest b4 installing your 2nd anti-virus, disable ur 1st one. then install ur 2nd one update/reboot and then disable ur 2nd one. then 'enable' ur 1st one. u can always use ur 2nd one 'on-demand' !
PS : remove the start-ups of ur 2nd virus, and convert their Services from Automatic to Manual. u wont waste any resources that way.
btw why install more than one antivirus??
its jus not needed. install one, turn on real time scanning , turn on automatic updates and thats it......
use avast ...its the best freeware antivirus for home, non commercial use ...
its jus not needed. install one, turn on real time scanning , turn on automatic updates and thats it......
use avast ...its the best freeware antivirus for home, non commercial use ...
I personally would suggest you not to go for two anti-viruses. It would sure slow down your computer to a considerable extent and secondly a single stand alone anti-virus like AVG, NOD32, Kaspersky, etc. is more than enough and would provide enough security. And as all of us know that all Anti-virus giants are kinda rivals they must be having a code in their softwares which would create compatibility issues with each other (though I am not sure how much truth is in it).
man the resources they would be using and the conflicts. I am sure they will start emerging eventually........
better stick to one and be safe..........
better stick to one and be safe..........
S
I guess one Antivirus software is enough. Sometimes it might cause compatibility issues and system lockups.
I use 4 AV in my system - AVG, ANTIVIR, AVAST, KAV. Thinkin of installing NOD 32 ..
@ iinfi , @rohan, @shoaib - With 1 AV, it wouldnt really protect ur sys. I had the same conception before but when I scannd thru with the others, there were trojans and viruses which werent detected.
I agree, that it does take a lot of resources but ultimately the objective is to protect the comp.
I'd recommed have atleast 3 in the sys and regularly scan and update them.
@ iinfi , @rohan, @shoaib - With 1 AV, it wouldnt really protect ur sys. I had the same conception before but when I scannd thru with the others, there were trojans and viruses which werent detected.
I agree, that it does take a lot of resources but ultimately the objective is to protect the comp.
I'd recommed have atleast 3 in the sys and regularly scan and update them.
D
Dude you mean to say installing 4 av solutions makes you more secure than me having a single frequently updated av or even a no av sometimes but following basic security practices?
Lmao I would strongly disagree ! Allow me to explain,how do you think a virus/worm gets into your system in general ? Warez,Email attachements?
How about just not installing stuff which you know is malicious ? How about not clicking that email attachement which says "I Love You by Sourasaurus"
These are instances from where malicious programs enters into your computer.User Intervention is certainly needed to propagate a virus,whereas the same case is not true for worms which spread without intervention.But I believe this is not rocket science to figure out after all.
Lets take your practise into a practical example,do you think servers which run 24/7 connected to the internet serving content continously one way or the other are loaded with 2av? 3? 4?
What matters most is best security practises.Cause no matter how many av you load apart from other implications the system faces you will be doomed if its a 0-day virus/worm.So your 4 av security tip is completely a false sense of security !
Lmao I would strongly disagree ! Allow me to explain,how do you think a virus/worm gets into your system in general ? Warez,Email attachements?
How about just not installing stuff which you know is malicious ? How about not clicking that email attachement which says "I Love You by Sourasaurus"
These are instances from where malicious programs enters into your computer.User Intervention is certainly needed to propagate a virus,whereas the same case is not true for worms which spread without intervention.But I believe this is not rocket science to figure out after all.
Lets take your practise into a practical example,do you think servers which run 24/7 connected to the internet serving content continously one way or the other are loaded with 2av? 3? 4?
What matters most is best security practises.Cause no matter how many av you load apart from other implications the system faces you will be doomed if its a 0-day virus/worm.So your 4 av security tip is completely a false sense of security !
T
4 AV's ?
WTF???!!!
good god man .. paranoia at its best
i was using mcafee in my n00b days
then i shifted to norton
with every passing release of norton its system requirements increases and also its load on the system
then i shifted to KAV... and now since a month im on no antivirus
the key is common sense as pointed above ..
using 2/4/10/20 av's is not gonna help u in anyways if that "ONE" virus that neither detects get thru !!
the concept of 24/7 not haivng AV's is ok cuz they use restricted access ... using firewalls and routers, allowing blockin certain connections and ports
and yeah its simple to implement this at a home PC as well
a good firewall and a lil knowledge can go a lloonnnggg way
WTF???!!!
good god man .. paranoia at its best
i was using mcafee in my n00b days
then i shifted to norton
with every passing release of norton its system requirements increases and also its load on the system
then i shifted to KAV... and now since a month im on no antivirus
the key is common sense as pointed above ..
using 2/4/10/20 av's is not gonna help u in anyways if that "ONE" virus that neither detects get thru !!
the concept of 24/7 not haivng AV's is ok cuz they use restricted access ... using firewalls and routers, allowing blockin certain connections and ports
and yeah its simple to implement this at a home PC as well
a good firewall and a lil knowledge can go a lloonnnggg way
digen said:
roftlmao
*forums.macrumors.com/images/smilies/eek.gif *forums.macrumors.com/images/smilies/eek.gifI am no security expert but I have common sense... i don't even use an A/V.. just use ur common sense.. as diggy said... spyware/viri are just too different for you not to notice them! Just be careful!
A
Instead of two AVs, it would just be better to use a double-engine AV. For example, GDATA AVK (antiviruslab.com) uses the BitDefender and Kaspersky AV engines together in a single AV program.
If you use a double-engine AV, then the two engines do not conflict with each other at all
If you use a double-engine AV, then the two engines do not conflict with each other at all
D
I tend to disagree on this regard.A firewall,router or any perimeter device for that matter wont help you blocking or detecting a virus/worm.A simple malicious email attachement can creat havoc eating bandwidth.What will the firewall do in this regard? Nothing only act according to the ruleset configured allow/deny policy.
So a AV will totally serve a different purpose imho which cant be achieved with a firewall/router.
Thats right ! And if u want to use avast with norton then avast will auto disable real time protection after installationIndyan said:
There are combinationsthat will not conflict .Such as AVG 7 and Antivir.But normally Norton nd Mcafee are not that kind
That happened in my case but I cannot start AVAST
again even after diabling NIS. So I wanted to uninstall Avast, tried 5-6 times, yet to be uninstalled. ANOTHER PROBLEM STARTED 
P
use of more than a single virus scanner is more of a headache than of any use. Safe habits,combined with an updated virus scanner can keep the hazards away..
i've tried using more thn a virus scanner whn i was young, just to check..unfortunately,hell lot of a problems happend and i had to ultimately format my disc!! They were mcafee and norton...war of scanners i believe!!!
i've tried using more thn a virus scanner whn i was young, just to check..unfortunately,hell lot of a problems happend and i had to ultimately format my disc!! They were mcafee and norton...war of scanners i believe!!!
T
diggy i said that only cuz no ones gonna check mails on a server
that was my only point
no user intervention = less chances of anyone planting a worm/virus
as for double engine AV's
they are crap
single engine AV's have higher detection rate than them
a very good example is/was AVK i think it was called
which used double engines
.. lost to KAV in abt over 1% detection rate .. which i might add is pretty bad when ur dealin with SECURITY
that was my only point
no user intervention = less chances of anyone planting a worm/virus
as for double engine AV's
they are crap
single engine AV's have higher detection rate than them
a very good example is/was AVK i think it was called
which used double engines
.. lost to KAV in abt over 1% detection rate .. which i might add is pretty bad when ur dealin with SECURITY
D
Thats true dude but cant a server be a MAIL SERVER which runs 24/7 running Sendmail or any mail server for that matter?
How would the machine survive without a AV solution ?
Imho considering a "server" as only a HTTP or FTP isnt doing justice to the server definition at all.
As far as checking emails on a server is concerned that would be a disaster aint it? Ask my college network admin,he knows best
How would the machine survive without a AV solution ?
Imho considering a "server" as only a HTTP or FTP isnt doing justice to the server definition at all.
As far as checking emails on a server is concerned that would be a disaster aint it? Ask my college network admin,he knows best
T
yes .. but when a mail server ISNT required.. why keep it open and running ?
and even mail servers at the most store files. . not run it unless someone does. . or its timed ...
a mail server would store files till user downloads and runs on local computer ...
ofcourse that doesnt make them obvlivious to virus attacks .. but my point .. they dun overdo it with 2/4/5/50 av solutions ...
ofcourse they do use it ....
and even mail servers at the most store files. . not run it unless someone does. . or its timed ...
a mail server would store files till user downloads and runs on local computer ...
ofcourse that doesnt make them obvlivious to virus attacks .. but my point .. they dun overdo it with 2/4/5/50 av solutions ...
ofcourse they do use it ....
D
Dude I think seem to have lost you completely.
Mail Server ISNT or IS required depends on the requirement.Anyone could either outsource it or setup a email server in their own premises.It will depend on what they feel is right & want to do.
I dont know which example you are stating w.r.t cause I'm talking about a GENERAL scenario.
As far as opening attachements or user intervention is concerned for example a LAN of 30 hosts per say with a MS Exchange deployed do you expect all users in the LAN to not open that attachement which says "yada yada" ?
Everyone dont think on the same terms as we do maybe..
There is always that everyday joe who thinks the other way around going ..click click ...BOOM !
Forget about the example I gave above,if what you seem to say is correct then why will these solutions exists in the market?
MS Exchange AV Partners
Email Server AV Solutions
As far as overdoing is concerned is concerned I've already written a post before you stating the same.
So I dont know where you got the idea that I was promoting 2/4/.. AV solutions lol
P.S:The entire above post & the earlier posts have been written with a GENERAL SCENARIO in mind.
Mail Server ISNT or IS required depends on the requirement.Anyone could either outsource it or setup a email server in their own premises.It will depend on what they feel is right & want to do.
I dont know which example you are stating w.r.t cause I'm talking about a GENERAL scenario.
As far as opening attachements or user intervention is concerned for example a LAN of 30 hosts per say with a MS Exchange deployed do you expect all users in the LAN to not open that attachement which says "yada yada" ?
Everyone dont think on the same terms as we do maybe..
There is always that everyday joe who thinks the other way around going ..click click ...BOOM !
Forget about the example I gave above,if what you seem to say is correct then why will these solutions exists in the market?
MS Exchange AV Partners
Email Server AV Solutions
As far as overdoing is concerned is concerned I've already written a post before you stating the same.
So I dont know where you got the idea that I was promoting 2/4/.. AV solutions lol
P.S:The entire above post & the earlier posts have been written with a GENERAL SCENARIO in mind.
C
u cant. it ll have conflict.