|
|
|
|
|
by fulafel
2933 days ago
|
|
Are any AV vendors marketing themselves as more secure than the competition, with technically founded evidence? Such as memory-safe PLs, VM or OS sandboxes, running 3rd party native code in an emulator, bug bounties, etc. Though probably their customers are mainly corporate "intranet" environments where users open random content with Acrobat, Office etc and the high bit is to just halve (1) the daily mass malware infections - which are not av focused yet. (1) or whatever the average AV detection rate is these days. |
|
A/Vs are largely attack vectors, a huge number of malware already tries to detect if an A/V is present and then uses it to get SYSTEM level privilege fairly easily.
The number of actually good A/Vs is low and in my opinion, simply use Microsoft Defender on Windows. For 0-days it's detection rate is, to my knowledge, not significantly worse than any other A/V and unlike other products they properly integrate into the system and don't disable almost all security measures of the kernel like ASLR and friends so they can inject some garbage DLL into any process.
The best protection for the intranet customer is training and regular software updates. For the average user it's to tighten up security, lock them out and then run regular updates.