C
Chap
Can McAfee and Norton AV exist together...Win-XP Home SP2?
TIA
TIA
C
Conor
Yes but there'll be one hell of a performance hit if they're both set
to realtime scanning.
D
Dale Benjamin
Yes, but having them both running on the same computer at the same time
is going to degrade the machine's performance. I used to alternate
Symantec and AVG6 by changing what gets loaded at startup with msconfig,
and they seemed OK. But Ian K. advised me last week that some of the
antivirus components run as 'services', thus are not disabled via
msconfig. On WinME, that's Start, Programs, Accessories, System Tools,
System Information, Software Environment to see what's running.
is going to degrade the machine's performance. I used to alternate
Symantec and AVG6 by changing what gets loaded at startup with msconfig,
and they seemed OK. But Ian K. advised me last week that some of the
antivirus components run as 'services', thus are not disabled via
msconfig. On WinME, that's Start, Programs, Accessories, System Tools,
System Information, Software Environment to see what's running.
P
PineNut
I just disable Auto-Protect mode of Norton Antivirus from the system
tray.
S
Syncme
If you just want it for the occasional system scan and not run in theChap said:
background you can use several online virus scans. This way you don't have
to install 2 applications on the computer and will have the latest
definitions (at least for the online).
http://housecall.trendmicro.com/housecall/start_corp.asp
http://www.pandasoftware.com/activescan/
http://www.ravantivirus.com/scan/indexie.php
http://www.symantec.com/cgi-bin/securitycheck.cgi
http://us.mcafee.com/root/mfs/default.asp
T
Thomas G. Marshall
Dale Benjamin coughed up:
Yes, I have the following coexisting:
AVG7
Norton SystemWorks 2003
And I have NAV2003 autoprotect on, and AVG7's whatever-you-call-it disabled,
and use it for manual scan only. The following two services are running:
AVG7 Alert Manager Server
AVG7 Update Service
Of these two, only the alert manager has accumulated CPU time: 26 seconds
since last real bootup. Is there anything worrysome about these two that I
don't know about?
Yes, I have the following coexisting:
AVG7
Norton SystemWorks 2003
And I have NAV2003 autoprotect on, and AVG7's whatever-you-call-it disabled,
and use it for manual scan only. The following two services are running:
AVG7 Alert Manager Server
AVG7 Update Service
Of these two, only the alert manager has accumulated CPU time: 26 seconds
since last real bootup. Is there anything worrysome about these two that I
don't know about?
S
Syncme
Yes, it can work however there are other services that notron loads thatPineNut said:
chew up your memory and cpu cycles.
D
David H. Lipman
It is generally NOT a good idea to to have two AV packages installed and running on a
platform at the same time. Therefore it is contraindicated.
However, it *may* be possible to have two installed as long as each packages does not do the
same as the other. For example ony one application should used for "On Access" scanning.
You would be better off NOT to have BOTH NAV and McAfee VirusScan applications installed.
You could have NAV installed and use TrendMicro Sysclean or the McAfee Command Line Scanner
as "On Demand" scanners. Neither needs installation and will not compete for resources nor
interfere with NAV. In addition you can use one of the several web based scanners as an
alternate "On Demand" scanner.
Trend Micro:
http://housecall.trendmicro.com/
http://housecall.antivirus.com
McAfee Security:
http://www.mcafee.com/myapps/mfs/default.asp
Panda ActiveScan:
http://www.pandasoftware.com/activescan/com/activescan_principal.htm
Computer Associates:
http://www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/virusinfo/scan.aspx
DialogueScience:
http://www.antivir.ru/english/www_av/
F-Secure:
http://support.f-secure.com/enu/home/ols.shtml
BitDefender
http://www.bitdefender.com/scan/license.php
Freedom Online scanner
http://www.freedom.net/viruscenter/index.html
--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
| Can McAfee and Norton AV exist together...Win-XP Home SP2?
|
| TIA
platform at the same time. Therefore it is contraindicated.
However, it *may* be possible to have two installed as long as each packages does not do the
same as the other. For example ony one application should used for "On Access" scanning.
You would be better off NOT to have BOTH NAV and McAfee VirusScan applications installed.
You could have NAV installed and use TrendMicro Sysclean or the McAfee Command Line Scanner
as "On Demand" scanners. Neither needs installation and will not compete for resources nor
interfere with NAV. In addition you can use one of the several web based scanners as an
alternate "On Demand" scanner.
Trend Micro:
http://housecall.trendmicro.com/
http://housecall.antivirus.com
McAfee Security:
http://www.mcafee.com/myapps/mfs/default.asp
Panda ActiveScan:
http://www.pandasoftware.com/activescan/com/activescan_principal.htm
Computer Associates:
http://www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/virusinfo/scan.aspx
DialogueScience:
http://www.antivir.ru/english/www_av/
F-Secure:
http://support.f-secure.com/enu/home/ols.shtml
BitDefender
http://www.bitdefender.com/scan/license.php
Freedom Online scanner
http://www.freedom.net/viruscenter/index.html
--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
| Can McAfee and Norton AV exist together...Win-XP Home SP2?
|
| TIA
M
Melissa
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Chap,
Others have given you reasonable enough answers with regards to the
specific question, so I'd like to digress into another aspect of the
question...namely, why bother?
First and foremost, I must say again that careful practices, and not
any AV/AT software, should be one's primary AV/AT "solution". Once
careful practices become second nature, there's really no need for
multiple programs that strive to do basically the same thing. I
still consider the "one might catch what the other might miss at any
given moment" idea not of the greatest use in spite of its obviously
good intentions (especially with regards to specifically AV/AT
software). What if both happen to not have the latest signature
updates at the time of "comparative scanning" between the two? Can a
"clean" verdict from both then really mean much more than it does
when only using one scanner at any given moment?
In any event, from my own experience as a one time "queen of
overkill" in the AV/AT software department, I'll show you how I once
did things, and how I do them now...
About four years ago, I was into trying everything I could to make my
computer as impervious to any potential threat as possible, and still
have it able to connect to the Internet (originally, I thought mostly
in terms of "software solutions", since I still knew very little
about "careful practices"). I wanted to learn all I could about
keeping a machine clean of viruses, etc., and as a part of this, I
also wanted to get to know the various AV/AT software offerings, so
that I might choose a "bundle" of packages that fit my own needs. I
learned that my "needs" changed as a result of the learning process
itself, and so my original excitement over being able to right-click
on anything and being offered the choice of several different AV/AT
scanners soon felt meaningless, and now I recommend against this type
of overkill I was so fond of at one point.
During the height of my "testing frenzy" four years ago, here's what
I had installed *all at the same time* (though I only ran one
on-access scanner at any given moment):
[before the following list, I'd already tried and decided against
both NAV and McAfee]
KAV (Kaspersky "Personal Pro")
Panda Platinum
F-Prot for Windows (and DOS)
NOD32
Dr. Web
InoculateIT (first freeware, then payware workgroup edition)
AVG Pro (first freeware, then Pro edition)
TDS-3 (anti-Trojan plus other system utilities)
BOClean (a different sort of anti-Trojan)
ADinf32 Pro
And what do I have installed now?
NOD32 (running in background)
BOClean (running in background)
TDS-3 (only for occasional on-demand scanning and/or other utilities)
TDS-3 is great, but I hardly ever think about it anymore, other than
to keep it updated "just in case". Both NOD32 and BOClean also have
little or nothing to get excited about other than keep themselves
updated. Now and then, NOD32 will pop up warning me of a virus laden
email that just came in, so I'll go have a look, then delete it.
I also have a few AdWare/Spyware scanners (they usually only find a
cookie or two), but I don't run any of them in the background, as I
use browser settings and a web filter to deal with potential web
based nasties, and I use an email client designed with
security/privacy in mind, so I'm not worried about embedded active
scripting in HTML, web bugs, etc. I also run a software firewall.
Basically, once "careful practices" becomes second nature, and you've
made good choices with regards to Internet software and their
configurations (email/news clients, web browsers, etc.), your AV/AT
software should really have very little to actually "save you from",
and the idea of overkill simply becomes wasteful. Now, the only time
I really spend worrying about viruses and such is when I'm trying to
help a friend or family member sort out some problem with their own
machines. Otherwise, with careful practices that are now second
nature, and two nearly transparent AV/AT programs as backup, I can
just spend my computing time doing those things I wanted a computer
for in the first place.
Though I'm sure some "experts" will disagree with my ultimate wisdom
here (or lack thereof), at this point, I don't recommend bothering
with multiple AV scanners. Just be careful, run perhaps one AV and
one AT you're comfortable with, occasionally scan for spyware, etc.,
but forget about software overkill, as it's most likely just not
worth the bother, and it probably won't make you any "safer by
default" either. The concept of "false sense of security" comes to
mind when I think of the kind of anti-everything software overkill I
was once so happy to engage in.
- --
Melissa
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFCBSieKgHVMc6ouYMRAnNkAKDgx8ATaBddn1R45P3O6uOr0Nvo/gCgjObP
GjQ7EVaIp0MCEuy7SSdzND4=
=QsOn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Chap,
Others have given you reasonable enough answers with regards to the
specific question, so I'd like to digress into another aspect of the
question...namely, why bother?
First and foremost, I must say again that careful practices, and not
any AV/AT software, should be one's primary AV/AT "solution". Once
careful practices become second nature, there's really no need for
multiple programs that strive to do basically the same thing. I
still consider the "one might catch what the other might miss at any
given moment" idea not of the greatest use in spite of its obviously
good intentions (especially with regards to specifically AV/AT
software). What if both happen to not have the latest signature
updates at the time of "comparative scanning" between the two? Can a
"clean" verdict from both then really mean much more than it does
when only using one scanner at any given moment?
In any event, from my own experience as a one time "queen of
overkill" in the AV/AT software department, I'll show you how I once
did things, and how I do them now...
About four years ago, I was into trying everything I could to make my
computer as impervious to any potential threat as possible, and still
have it able to connect to the Internet (originally, I thought mostly
in terms of "software solutions", since I still knew very little
about "careful practices"). I wanted to learn all I could about
keeping a machine clean of viruses, etc., and as a part of this, I
also wanted to get to know the various AV/AT software offerings, so
that I might choose a "bundle" of packages that fit my own needs. I
learned that my "needs" changed as a result of the learning process
itself, and so my original excitement over being able to right-click
on anything and being offered the choice of several different AV/AT
scanners soon felt meaningless, and now I recommend against this type
of overkill I was so fond of at one point.
During the height of my "testing frenzy" four years ago, here's what
I had installed *all at the same time* (though I only ran one
on-access scanner at any given moment):
[before the following list, I'd already tried and decided against
both NAV and McAfee]
KAV (Kaspersky "Personal Pro")
Panda Platinum
F-Prot for Windows (and DOS)
NOD32
Dr. Web
InoculateIT (first freeware, then payware workgroup edition)
AVG Pro (first freeware, then Pro edition)
TDS-3 (anti-Trojan plus other system utilities)
BOClean (a different sort of anti-Trojan)
ADinf32 Pro
And what do I have installed now?
NOD32 (running in background)
BOClean (running in background)
TDS-3 (only for occasional on-demand scanning and/or other utilities)
TDS-3 is great, but I hardly ever think about it anymore, other than
to keep it updated "just in case". Both NOD32 and BOClean also have
little or nothing to get excited about other than keep themselves
updated. Now and then, NOD32 will pop up warning me of a virus laden
email that just came in, so I'll go have a look, then delete it.
I also have a few AdWare/Spyware scanners (they usually only find a
cookie or two), but I don't run any of them in the background, as I
use browser settings and a web filter to deal with potential web
based nasties, and I use an email client designed with
security/privacy in mind, so I'm not worried about embedded active
scripting in HTML, web bugs, etc. I also run a software firewall.
Basically, once "careful practices" becomes second nature, and you've
made good choices with regards to Internet software and their
configurations (email/news clients, web browsers, etc.), your AV/AT
software should really have very little to actually "save you from",
and the idea of overkill simply becomes wasteful. Now, the only time
I really spend worrying about viruses and such is when I'm trying to
help a friend or family member sort out some problem with their own
machines. Otherwise, with careful practices that are now second
nature, and two nearly transparent AV/AT programs as backup, I can
just spend my computing time doing those things I wanted a computer
for in the first place.
Though I'm sure some "experts" will disagree with my ultimate wisdom
here (or lack thereof), at this point, I don't recommend bothering
with multiple AV scanners. Just be careful, run perhaps one AV and
one AT you're comfortable with, occasionally scan for spyware, etc.,
but forget about software overkill, as it's most likely just not
worth the bother, and it probably won't make you any "safer by
default" either. The concept of "false sense of security" comes to
mind when I think of the kind of anti-everything software overkill I
was once so happy to engage in.
- --
Melissa
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFCBSieKgHVMc6ouYMRAnNkAKDgx8ATaBddn1R45P3O6uOr0Nvo/gCgjObP
GjQ7EVaIp0MCEuy7SSdzND4=
=QsOn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
R
Roger Wilco
[snip]
Although it "could" be the case that what one misses the other does not,
the real reason to have more than one is to help with FP detections
(second or third opinion scans). So there is really no need to have more
than one of them active.
Assuming connectivity, with online scanners available (like VirusTotal)
your second and third opinion scans are available anyway - so like you
say "why bother?".
Although it "could" be the case that what one misses the other does not,
the real reason to have more than one is to help with FP detections
(second or third opinion scans). So there is really no need to have more
than one of them active.
Assuming connectivity, with online scanners available (like VirusTotal)
your second and third opinion scans are available anyway - so like you
say "why bother?".
D
David H. Lipman
I second that !
--
Dave
|
| |
| [snip]
|
| > I still consider the "one might catch what the other might miss at any
| > given moment" idea not of the greatest use in spite of its obviously
| > good intentions (especially with regards to specifically AV/AT
| > software). What if both happen to not have the latest signature
| > updates at the time of "comparative scanning" between the two? Can a
| > "clean" verdict from both then really mean much more than it does
| > when only using one scanner at any given moment?
|
| Although it "could" be the case that what one misses the other does not,
| the real reason to have more than one is to help with FP detections
| (second or third opinion scans). So there is really no need to have more
| than one of them active.
|
| Assuming connectivity, with online scanners available (like VirusTotal)
| your second and third opinion scans are available anyway - so like you
| say "why bother?".
|
|
--
Dave
|
| |
| [snip]
|
| > I still consider the "one might catch what the other might miss at any
| > given moment" idea not of the greatest use in spite of its obviously
| > good intentions (especially with regards to specifically AV/AT
| > software). What if both happen to not have the latest signature
| > updates at the time of "comparative scanning" between the two? Can a
| > "clean" verdict from both then really mean much more than it does
| > when only using one scanner at any given moment?
|
| Although it "could" be the case that what one misses the other does not,
| the real reason to have more than one is to help with FP detections
| (second or third opinion scans). So there is really no need to have more
| than one of them active.
|
| Assuming connectivity, with online scanners available (like VirusTotal)
| your second and third opinion scans are available anyway - so like you
| say "why bother?".
|
|
S
Silly Me
Whenever I run the online scanner at Trend Micro I have to disable NAV or
autoprotect will detect four unencrypted download.Trojan patterns in temp
and delete them. I know these are false positives, but some people may
think they are viruses flushed out by housecall.
I agree, run one AV program and use other scanners as needed. Also,
practice safe hex at all times.
T
Thomas G. Marshall
Silly Me coughed up:
....[rip]...
[...]practice safe hex at all times.
I just cannot wait until that totally geeky term /safe hex/ dies away for
good...
....[rip]...
[...]practice safe hex at all times.
I just cannot wait until that totally geeky term /safe hex/ dies away for
good...
G
Greg R
How did you get it to install? They detect each other.
Greg R
T
Thomas G. Marshall
Greg R said:
I had NAV2003 up and running, and then installed AVG7 without worry. I
didn't even deactivate the norton auto-protect to do the avg install. There
were no complaints from either package.