There is no doubt about it, the amount of threats facing technology users today is higher than ever before, and it keeps increasing. After looking over some recent reports about some of the ‘free’ security suites available and how they scored in ‘real world’ tests, I’m no longer recommending free security suites to clients, especially with the prevalence of ransomware now.
You can purchase multiple user licenses of top notch security suites at a very reasonable price now, so there’s no excuse not to spend as much as $10 a year for each computer you’re protecting. If you’re wondering where that price came from you’ll find out if you keep reading.
Before I go any further, there is one fundamental consideration you need to take into account when recommending a security suite to clients. What operating systems are your clients running, and do they want all of their devices secured, including tablets and other mobile devices? Some security suites don’t cover mobile devices. Also, while one certain security suite performs fairly well on Windows XP, which is still in use in a disturbingly large number of businesses, it performs less effectively on Windows 8.1.
I’d guess that most technicians have a service package that includes keeping the computer running at top speed, and eliminating things that would slow down the client’s experience on the computer, so recommending a security suite that has great protection but is a terrible load on the system resources isn’t the best idea, so that’s another consideration.
In considering all those things, what are the top security suites to recommend to clients? Looking at some recent tests and also protection for operating systems back to XP, there are two that stand out at the top of the list as far as protection, system load, and usability: Kaspersky and Bitdefender. I have to say that I haven’t really used Bitdefender, but I’ve seen it in use and it does seem slower to respond to threats than Kaspersky, and there have been some complaints about it being buggy and a little more resource intensive. Bitdefender does offer mobile device protection and anti-theft, and so does Kaspersky’s Multi Device suite.
However, I have used Kaspersky and have recommended it for several years for those who want good protection on their devices that isn’t provided by free security suites and scanners. In fact, while using a popular video streaming service, Kaspersky caught malware hiding in some *.wmv files in the streaming video, and the technicians at the service headquarters didn’t believe me until I sent them the log files with the details of the infected files and the location on their servers, which Kaspersky usefully recorded.
On the other hand, what if your client is using OS X? While Kaspersky scored highest on Windows 8.1, on OS X, Bitdefender scored slightly higher than Kaspersky. Even ESET scored over Kaspersky on OS X. Would your client prefer to have one solution for both types of devices so it’s not so much of a learning curve, or is protection of the highest concern to them? Also, while Kaspersky scored at the top as far as protecting Android devices from malware, it scored slightly lower than others as far as usability, and while that seems like a minor concern when it comes to anti-malware protection on a mobile device, it’s worth mentioning when you consider consumer users.
As far as price, you can get Kaspersky Internet Security 2015 (3 PCs) on Amazon.com for around $30, and the Multi-Device suite is also around $30 at this time. There is a newer version of the Multi-Device which is higher in cost, however. As far as BitDefender, the prices are similar for the 2014 versions when you account for the 2 year license. So next time your client asks what you recommend for a security suite for their device, find out what devices they’re trying to protect, and what operating systems they’re running. I doubt if anyone would say their device security isn’t worth even $10/year, or even $20/year, and that’s essentially the cost of one of the top security suites you can recommend to them.
Session expired
Please log in again. The login page will open in a new tab. After logging in you can close it and return to this page.
Thank you for the article.
Why do you say “Even ESET scored over Kaspersky on OS X” as if it is on the same level as Windows Defender?
We use ESET / NOD32 on a wide mix of residential and commercial systems, with a move towards it on a number of enterprise locations.
It is easy on the system and effective. Configuration of the firewall rules is easy and the software actually honor the changes. True, it doesn’t stop user stupidity like preventing the installation of the Ask Toolbar set every time Flash / Adobe is installed, but the Smart Security suite is quite solid.
I’ve had no joy out of BitDefender – far too buggy and removal sometimes makes me feel like I am trying to outsmart a well written virus.
Kaspersky is OK, but their activation system leaves a ton to be desired (paid products suddenly de-activating 6 months in, prompting a return visit by me).
The worst end-point solution I’ve encountered is TrendMicro (horrible configuration modules).
Cheers!
–m
I tend to agree with you ESET smart antivirus is a mainstay for both commercial and residential customers. it provides a overall good package and keeps most people out of harms way. but if they are determined to over ride the protection then nothing except getting a nasty virus is going to stop them
and when they get that virus they are going to get an ouch in the pocket book and in down time to their computer
I also agree with you on ESET. It is the main system we have been using and providing to our customers for at least 10 years now. Very solid and easy to configure.
Vipre is tops in my book, has never failed me. Fast, effective, and light on the system. Perfect for home and small business use.
I use Vipre in both Home and business application. I use it exclusively when recommending an AV solution. It has a very small footprint and is a great product
Totally agree with mainstay. Eset to me is the de facto standard. Have you tried or tested it?
Independent test? Seriously.
I am so tired of seeing skewed AV test results from AV-TEST and others. Placing free AV solutions along side of paid versions in a comparison test is fine, just as long as you include both each provider’s paid-for and free versions. For whatever reasons I can only surmise, AV-TEST *never* includes Avast!’s paid-for Internet Security Suite. Stating that Kaspersky’s paid-for top gun is better than Avast!’s free version is an expected “well, yeah” comparison. How would it fair against Avast!’s best? Avast! Interenet Security Suite is far less expensive than many tested and it has been the mainstay recommendation of my shop, used by us and our clients for several years now with little concern for malware infection. Could Kaspersky’s (or any of the others tested) be a better product? Possibly. But if I am to consider changing products lines I need to see how that product compares to my choice and clearely there is something wrong with tests made without some of the most common big hitters in the test field.
I’ve had good success with Emsisoft’s anti-malware and they have a new Internet security suite.
That’s one of the first tools I use for malware removal, right after Malwarebytes and SuperAntiSpyware.
We focus almost solely on residential customers, so we install the free version of Avast. Unfortunately; our users once felt that if they paid for a security package, they were immune from infection. It’s hard to believe that thinking adults believed that perfection had been attained by any product, but that was the prevailing opinion. We complete the security “recipe” by installing Firefox with Adblock Plus, WOT and Site Advisor. In addition to advising exclusive use of Firefox, we also provide written documentation detailing the methods used by criminals to infect computers. It has been years since a customer looked at me and said “why is my computer getting re-infected?”
I’ve been using Bitdefender for the past couple of years, on PC, Mac and Android, I recommend and sell lots of licenses, the Anti virus plus option goes for £10. A small price to pay.
A big plus for Eset. We sell several AVs brands, but Eset is really the best in installation, configuration and detection.
We have more than 500 licences installed (home and business) with a very small number of problems that where solved very fast by their excelent support.
But as someone said, there is no 100% fault proof Av.
I must also disagree with the recommendations in this article.
I have had a legal paid for copy of Kaspersky for 3 years. It never found any threats on my system. It was TERRIBLY, INCREDIBLY, UNUSEABLY SLOW!!! And I suspected malware due to my PC behaving strangely.
I put the drive in another PC which had AVG on it and scanned it. Wow, multiple virus infestations.
AVG is free, and it works.
Kaspersky is not free, it didn’t find the malware, and it’s SO SLOOOOW!!!
Check out this site if you don’t know about it. It will allow you to upload a file and it scans the file with 55 virus scanners.
https://www.virustotal.com/
22 of them found a virus in one of my files, and 17 found a virus in another file. AVG found them both. Kaspersky detected nothing.
Case closed. (As far as I’m concerned anyway. Exit Kaspersky.)
Cheers,
David.
I have never had any experience with Kaspersky. However, I have noticed AVG has detected a lot of false positives in their scans. Regardless, most problems I deal with are customers who get adware/malware, which rarely any antivirus will pick up.
My take on AV is that every product has issues and one will catch malware that another misses. I have used McAfee, Symantec, Avast, NOD32, Vipre and so on. As a service provider I am always on the lookout for better products.
The real problem is that av software is always outpaced by malware.
Currently we use webroot for all our customers. Here’s why.
First, it is incredibly light. The installation is so fast you might think nothing happened. This is no joke.
It is centrally managed via a web console. All our customers under one roof.
But the real reason is because of the way it protects machines. If an executable is introduced to the system webroot interrupts it. It checks to see if it is a known virus or known safe executable. If it is unknown webroot will shadow copy any files the executable tries to modify and will send the executable for analysis.
If it turns out to be malware we can roll back the system. Any files that were changed are returned to their previous state.
This, I feel, is the direction AV should be taking. I think as we move forward the trend will be toward this variant of sandboxing so I said “why wait?”
Totally agree, the small footprint of Webroot is great as long as you are connected to their cloud services for malware signatures ect, certainly superior product to most of the heavily front-end loaded offerings such as Kasperski or Bitdefender. I have not had success with these clunky products in the past, I would go with Vipre or Norton.
I’m surprised that this article makes no comment about selling these products through affiliate/referral sources? We re-sell BitDefender as a partner and it’s been a great solution for our customers as well as a nice $10 in our pocket per sale. I’d be interested to see an article highlighting the top-tier anti-virus products and the comparable referral amount to resell each product.
Avira for free
Bitdefender for paid
sandboxie is great too
I have a business client interested in security software for 20+ machines. I’d like to find a managed service where I can centrally manage the security software on each endpoint, preferably through the cloud. Any suggestions? Kapersky? BitDefender?
However, I am also interested in a solution that incorporates the above but also allows for general patch management and remote control. I’ve heard about Kaseya, LabTech, GFI and some others. Can these services handle workstation security (antivirus/malware), remote control AND patch management?
What do you do or use?
I use GFI for my business and it does in fact provide patch management and antivirus/malware protection. I am currently managing 29 workstations and a few servers and it has made things much easier. It uses managed version of Vipre antivirus which they claim to guarantee as well.
‘ve installer Kaspersky products on business and residential Pc’s for over 3 years now and have yet to have a returning customer with a virus. Adware is another story and KIS is over-aggressive in its search, finding too many false positives for my liking and so I add ADWcleaner for this reason. Add to this 10 minutes of instruction to the user/operator on running/checking/updating the softwares and I’m done.
No AV package is going to be ‘the best’ forever. As threats morph in the wild and AV search engines are developed, the battlefield changes.
That’s why in making my decision on KIS, I went to AV-comparatives.*** and studied their report history to see which product appeared the most in the top 3 of their tests. I tried all 3 and found KIS to have the easiest interface and most complete tool package of them all.
I’m not trying to say that KIS is the best nor that ‘av-comp’ is completely unbiased but I can say that the solution I have was born of research/trial & testing and it works for me and my customers.
Been an Eset reseller since back in the version 2.5 days (a Gold partner for many of those years). Was a great product, still very good…but since we’ve brought in our RMM product (N-Able) we switched to their bundled AV (was Panda..very good, they changed to BitDefender last year…very very good). Very pleased with it’s stopping power, we see very little infections with it. Kaspersky is also very good.
Either of those 3 are top notch in my book.
All brands of AV have their buggy years…we’ve gone through plenty of years of Eset causing server issues and especially Exchange.
We don’t do residential, only SMB.