I'm sure some of you have seen my "ranting" in another thread, but I figured I'd open a new thread to see if there are others who have run into the same problems I have had with antivirus software; or security software in general. I also wanted to see what security tips other members have to share, outside of running a security suite. I will add my own tips once this takes off; if at all.
Personally, I have had a hard time making security software both effective and non-intrusive with my daily activities. I've found more annoyances to the way security software handles things than I've found good, and this bothers me to no end. Today, I finally have called it quits on security software (ie: antivirus/security suites), and I'm quite happy about this. This will allow me to do more things on my computer with less hassle, and with less tied up resources; and, while resources haven't always been an issue, the constant sandboxing/etc. that security software does to various programs I use creates a problem. For example, streaming HD video from YouTube takes up more resources when running my last security software. I understand why certain tasks are handled in a certain way, but you don't really need a security software to protect yourself from all the risks they actively scan for.
As I've said before, it seems that, from my experience and consultation with "average" users, those who genuinely benefit from security software are those who don't take proper security measures on their own. This could mean that these people are either unaware of how to do things in a more secure fashion, they tend to prefer riskier methods of performing certain tasks (usually out of convenience), their work/employer does not support more secure options for at-home work, forcing them to choose from having two security protocols to follow (one for work, and one for off-duty activity) or sticking with the less secure safety measures all around; or they may just want a software to take care of security for them, because they don't care enough to bother learning practical security measures. I can honestly say that, as a personal opinion, the latter of the three is preposterous, because a security software cannot give a user proper security when they don't exercise effective security measures on their own. Also, I have personally seen plenty of people quickly move to unsafe/insecure methods for daily activities, because of their work/employer's requirements for at-home work. While I can understand the frustration that arises from using two security protocols (one for work, one for off-duty), I can honestly say that adopting your work security protocols for off-duty activities is typically going to be more likely to cause problems in the long term. It may not, but it definitely opens up more vulnerabilities.
But, enough of what I think, and my experiences... I want to see what other members have to say about this; if anything at all. From what I gather, it seems that most users on this forum either advocate security software as an "extra security measure" (which is almost pointless for the more advanced users), or they do not seem to be doing too much that would upset common security software; the latter of which may entail file sharing and/or pirating, or their software installs do not set off red flags in their security software. Considering I've had high quality security software prevent the installations of multiple genuine programs, I'd think the "average" user would have encountered at least one install that went wrong because of their security suite/software.
What is your experience of not using security software, and why did you stop using it?
Have you switched back to security software, and why?
Do you really think it gives you a level of protection?
Have you had any real infections/problems that did not arise from a combination of end-user laziness/lack of education and no security software?
I want to see all of this debated, so we can get myths debunked, misconceptions corrected, and see what data we can pull up to support all of our claims. This should be interesting!
Personally, I have had a hard time making security software both effective and non-intrusive with my daily activities. I've found more annoyances to the way security software handles things than I've found good, and this bothers me to no end. Today, I finally have called it quits on security software (ie: antivirus/security suites), and I'm quite happy about this. This will allow me to do more things on my computer with less hassle, and with less tied up resources; and, while resources haven't always been an issue, the constant sandboxing/etc. that security software does to various programs I use creates a problem. For example, streaming HD video from YouTube takes up more resources when running my last security software. I understand why certain tasks are handled in a certain way, but you don't really need a security software to protect yourself from all the risks they actively scan for.
As I've said before, it seems that, from my experience and consultation with "average" users, those who genuinely benefit from security software are those who don't take proper security measures on their own. This could mean that these people are either unaware of how to do things in a more secure fashion, they tend to prefer riskier methods of performing certain tasks (usually out of convenience), their work/employer does not support more secure options for at-home work, forcing them to choose from having two security protocols to follow (one for work, and one for off-duty activity) or sticking with the less secure safety measures all around; or they may just want a software to take care of security for them, because they don't care enough to bother learning practical security measures. I can honestly say that, as a personal opinion, the latter of the three is preposterous, because a security software cannot give a user proper security when they don't exercise effective security measures on their own. Also, I have personally seen plenty of people quickly move to unsafe/insecure methods for daily activities, because of their work/employer's requirements for at-home work. While I can understand the frustration that arises from using two security protocols (one for work, one for off-duty), I can honestly say that adopting your work security protocols for off-duty activities is typically going to be more likely to cause problems in the long term. It may not, but it definitely opens up more vulnerabilities.
But, enough of what I think, and my experiences... I want to see what other members have to say about this; if anything at all. From what I gather, it seems that most users on this forum either advocate security software as an "extra security measure" (which is almost pointless for the more advanced users), or they do not seem to be doing too much that would upset common security software; the latter of which may entail file sharing and/or pirating, or their software installs do not set off red flags in their security software. Considering I've had high quality security software prevent the installations of multiple genuine programs, I'd think the "average" user would have encountered at least one install that went wrong because of their security suite/software.
What is your experience of not using security software, and why did you stop using it?
Have you switched back to security software, and why?
Do you really think it gives you a level of protection?
Have you had any real infections/problems that did not arise from a combination of end-user laziness/lack of education and no security software?
I want to see all of this debated, so we can get myths debunked, misconceptions corrected, and see what data we can pull up to support all of our claims. This should be interesting!