![]() ![]() Quick Heal is the best funded, having most resources (Sequoia Capital) but ironically is worse off than K7 or eScan. Out of these, the only ones that are even half decent are K7, QuickHeal and eScan. Guardian NetSecure (basically, a cheap low end rebrand of QuickHeal, can be a LOT cheaper sometimes) I still use it and don't feel like changing it anytime soon. #Msecure antivirus review trial#However, the signatures of K7 are not that bad.įor sure, they cannot stand up to ESET and Kaspersky, but I believe they are faster than like Bitdefender.īecause of the great support (they do care if you tell them that for example Ransomware bypassed the protection, they might first release signatures, but also did release new versions after days in many cases), the price (I picked my license from eBay (as the shop of K7 was broken by that time and my trial expired - they also offer a 1y/1 PC sub for 39,99$, more devices / years discounted), the very low system impact, the great GUI, super-fast signature updates (seconds if daily, minutes if not updated for days) and K7 Total Security being non-intrusive but still protecting well with some care and a browser extension like Bitdefender Traffic Light, I would clearly pick this. They have introduced "Data Locker" in v16 which will prevent services not being whitelisted from writing to specific folders (by default pictures and documents, custom settings anytime), but I have also seen this getting bypassed in very rare cases. Still, Ransomware is a big problem, out of 10 ransomwares, 2-3 will not be detected by Behaviour Blocker / Anti-Ransomware Standalone Module. Judging from my HUB experience and personal tests (I am very busy ATM, cannot provide tests on my own, but do personally test the stuff provided in the HUB), I have the feeling K7 BB and HIPS have improved a lot. ![]() However, I have the impression that v16 which was released somewhen Q3/2019 (?) has improved the Behaviour Blocker a lot, and they keep improving it, as you can notice by a change in the version number after small and fast updates (sometimes reboot is needed, I think this is related to Anti-Ransomware module, at least I noticed it after I reported ransomware bypasses via ticket to K7, and they responded with a new version days after). It was much weaker than Quick Heal back then. I think it was v15 i tested last year a few days in the HUB / personally without posting results. Which makes me worry that malware which is not detected by BB will stay in memory for days, before signatures might catch up.Īs for system impact, GUI, the product clearly shines.Īlso I like the support a lot, they also did listen for behaviour blocker bypass reports. #Msecure antivirus review update#I think tested it recently, he might give more insight.įor Europe, i find it overpriced (74$ for 1y/1PC on their website, I did not find it cheaper on eBay - beware of the Multi-Device-one for 75$ - it was the old v17 version when I tried it - they improved the product a lot with v18).Īs for signatures, 1 update a day, without any third party engine is too less.Īt least the Behaviour Blocker is very sensitive, it will block most threats. It's GUI is very outdated, the signature updates take long (big size?). However, it seems to use both Bitdefender signatures and Bitdefender Behavior Blocker. I cannot tell much about, had it only for a few days, it seems to be not compatible with ShadowDefender (at least on my machine, it was kinda unstable). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |