6 ms·

Failure in Tech Journalism: Getting the Truth about Antivirus Software

71 points by miles 5y ago

nitwit005 5y ago
The press isn't going to devote more money to an article than they expect article will make them back in profit. You'll never see the depth that's being asked for, unless there's some existing scandal that might draw reader attention.
- viraptor 5y ago
  They have an option of not writing about something rather than doing the bare minimum for clicks. There's no reason we shouldn't expect better and criticise outlets for advertising crappy solutions without a real review. Calling out such outlets is great. Same with articles about the security VPNs give you.
- smt88 5y ago
  This is totally untrue for reputable publications like Wired or Ars Technica. The editors may shut something down that isn't interesting, but the writers aren't making decisions based on profitability. If people want good journalism, get it from a good publication with real editorial firewalls and standards. If you're reading blogs, you're going to get blogs.
  - nitwit005 5y ago
    There exists no news publication where costs are not a consideration. No one is going to give people an unlimited budget for an article few people will read.
    - smt88 5y ago
      That's a very different assertion than the one I was replying to.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Ocha 5y ago
Have you tried Nod32? I have been using them for more than 10 years and never had a problem. It has quarantined couple of questionable files, but I had no problem restoring it within the app. Whitelisting those files though took some effort. :/
dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
This is not surprising because the dynamics at play here is that antivirus software is just boring, people prefer to review the newest shiny GPUs, CPUs and other gear, but few want to deal with boring stuff. Therefore antivirus companies typically select the media outlets and pay them regularly for ads and reviews. Therefore it's quite rare for a tech review site to run a big story on how bad antivirus software is, unless they do something extremely bad like Avast last year.
hellotomyrars 5y ago
The author is really kind of all over the place in this piece which for me really serves to reduce its impact. Clearly they had a strong need to vent, somewhat warranted, but they are casting a very wide net of aspersions. There are a lot of issues with the industry around antivirus/security vendors. It is a very gross industry for a lot of different reasons, but the trying to tie that into how Google is evil and also tech journalism is corrupt and unfit makes the author come across so much weaker. I’m also a little confused as to why the author, already unhappy with the free version of the product, decided to pony up for the paid version in the first place. Semi-related: AV software plays a huge role in the security ecosystem and it’s value is unmistakable in that context but it is worth considering how we get there. The way AV software is sold and marketed is generally some of the slimiest, especially the non-big name stuff. We all benefit from the very wide net they cast in a collective sense but from the end-user perspective, especially as a technically savvy user, the cost seems outweighed by the benefit. Personally I’m of the mind that if anything is questionable I’ll run it through virustotal on-demand and make a judgement from their but also if I’m wondering that deeply enough I’m just as inclined not to touch something potentially volatile. This doesn’t work for a layperson but the stuff built in to windows is honestly more than enough for a casual user. If things have progressed beyond that, they need professional help anyways.
- atoav 5y ago
  There is this class of tech outlets for "advanced" computer users (the kind which comes with CDs and USB drives full of "useful" software) which is pure snake oil marketing material. The truth is, that with the right behaviour you probably don't need any AV product. Don't click on weird links, use adblockers, don't open weird documents especially when they come via mail, keep your OS and software up to date, etc. For all the other stuff (zero days) AV software won't help you and in fact AV software will often even increase the attack surface of your system (remote code execution via AV-buffer overflow is not a rare thing to happen). On my Windows machines I am not using AV software since roughly a decade and I have not had a single issue. Telling people that they can click around carefree if only they have an AV software installed is irresponsible IMO. AV software is not a substitute for education.
ChrisSD 5y ago
Anti-malware software is almost universally terrible. My advice is to use the one that comes with Windows (aka Windows Defender). It's not perfect but it's the least worst option. Whatever you do, don't use McAfee. And definitely don't use some other random software you found online no matter what the reviews say. This type of software is always incredibly invasive. There is almost zero reason to give this much power over your system to another third party.
- 1337shadow 5y ago
  In case you already have McAfee, you can use this tutorial by John McAfee himself to remove it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgf5PaBzyg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgf5PaBzyg
- pram 5y ago
  Yes I used Bitdefender for awhile, which was fine, and then they started installing stuff like VPN clients and weird browser extensions. I literally paid for it too, but not anymore. Total shady bullshit.
- varnaud 5y ago
  I removed Avira antivirus from my grandma low spec laptop and switched to the builtin Windows one. My suspicious was that it was constantly scanning the HDD and running a bunch of processes that overworked the laptop limited capacities. Boot to Firefox was improved by at least 30 seconds, navigating the file explorer felt much smoother and security was probably improved as well. For home users, I don't see any reasons to use a third party antivirus nowadays.
- formerly_proven 5y ago
  https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiniP-kUkAE36aI?format=jpg&name=900x900 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiniP-kUkAE36aI?format=jpg&name=... AVs and other "security products" massively increase attack surface (sometimes by literally disabling protections that the OS itself has, but usually by just being buggy and insecure in itself and doing things in obviously bad and insecure ways to be faster) and have been leveraged in so many attacks now that it's truly remarkable that there is zero change in how people think about it.
cryptica 5y ago
I haven't used antivirus software in over a decade. I consider them to be viruses themselves. Most of them are written by ex-hackers. My solution is to use Linux and to only download files I trust.
- dspillett 5y ago
  > and to only download files I trust That works for those of us with a bit of knowledge. Unfortunately it is hard for those who don't have time to, or don't want to, build that experience. How do they know what can and can't be trusted? Many bad downloads should be obvious to even a half-wit (and I'm not above unsympathetically sniggering when someone I know falls for them) but many are more clever, or difficult to avoid once you've fallen in to the trap. > use Linux That won't protect the inexperienced user from everything, by any measure.
- adxl 5y ago
  And if you must run windows for some specific program then run it on Linux in VirtualBox and only run that program. When finished with the program (tax software and other related for me) shut down VirtualBox. Keep snapshots and backups of your work from VirtualBox and you will most likely have no problems.
cooper45 5y ago
Thanks for sharing.I found a lot of interesting information here. A really good post, very thankful and hopeful that you will write many more posts like this one. https://www.myloweslife.life/ https://www.myloweslife.life/
Macha 5y ago
> As if to emphasize the cultural differences between America and Romania, Bitdefender’s website reportedly prevents people from canceling auto-renew. To quote one user’s reaction, !? A great many US products and services have similar approachs. Think ISPs, gyms, the NYT, etc. I agree the behaviour is scummy, but no need single out Romania for it.
- willis936 5y ago
  There is a difference between a contractual agreement to use a service for a period of time and just pulling money out without such a contract or any other form of consent. That is to say: one is legal in the US and the other is not.
  - Macha 5y ago
    I'm sure NYT and Bitdefender both have "the contract auto-renews unless explicitly cancelled" in their terms. The only place NYT allows you to cancel online is California, because of relatively recent regulation. Elsewhere you need to contact their retention department. I'm really not seeing the difference between their actions.
juancn 5y ago
Most third-party antiviruses cause more problems than viruses do in my experience. They tend to hook into system calls and slow down the computer in hard to diagnose ways. Sometimes they don't implement the hooks correctly and cause subtle bugs on top of the slowdown. I only use built in ones (such as Windows defender) which at least have the pushback of some other teams that own the APIs that are intercepted and tend to strike a better balance.

71 points by miles 5y ago

The press isn't going to devote more money to an article than they expect article will make them back in profit. You'll never see the depth that's being asked for, unless there's some existing scandal that might draw reader attention.

viraptor 5y ago
They have an option of not writing about something rather than doing the bare minimum for clicks. There's no reason we shouldn't expect better and criticise outlets for advertising crappy solutions without a real review. Calling out such outlets is great. Same with articles about the security VPNs give you.
smt88 5y ago
This is totally untrue for reputable publications like Wired or Ars Technica. The editors may shut something down that isn't interesting, but the writers aren't making decisions based on profitability. If people want good journalism, get it from a good publication with real editorial firewalls and standards. If you're reading blogs, you're going to get blogs.
- nitwit005 5y ago
  There exists no news publication where costs are not a consideration. No one is going to give people an unlimited budget for an article few people will read.
  - smt88 5y ago
    That's a very different assertion than the one I was replying to.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Ocha 5y ago

Have you tried Nod32? I have been using them for more than 10 years and never had a problem. It has quarantined couple of questionable files, but I had no problem restoring it within the app. Whitelisting those files though took some effort. :/

dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago

This is not surprising because the dynamics at play here is that antivirus software is just boring, people prefer to review the newest shiny GPUs, CPUs and other gear, but few want to deal with boring stuff. Therefore antivirus companies typically select the media outlets and pay them regularly for ads and reviews. Therefore it's quite rare for a tech review site to run a big story on how bad antivirus software is, unless they do something extremely bad like Avast last year.

hellotomyrars 5y ago

The author is really kind of all over the place in this piece which for me really serves to reduce its impact. Clearly they had a strong need to vent, somewhat warranted, but they are casting a very wide net of aspersions. There are a lot of issues with the industry around antivirus/security vendors. It is a very gross industry for a lot of different reasons, but the trying to tie that into how Google is evil and also tech journalism is corrupt and unfit makes the author come across so much weaker. I’m also a little confused as to why the author, already unhappy with the free version of the product, decided to pony up for the paid version in the first place. Semi-related: AV software plays a huge role in the security ecosystem and it’s value is unmistakable in that context but it is worth considering how we get there. The way AV software is sold and marketed is generally some of the slimiest, especially the non-big name stuff. We all benefit from the very wide net they cast in a collective sense but from the end-user perspective, especially as a technically savvy user, the cost seems outweighed by the benefit. Personally I’m of the mind that if anything is questionable I’ll run it through virustotal on-demand and make a judgement from their but also if I’m wondering that deeply enough I’m just as inclined not to touch something potentially volatile. This doesn’t work for a layperson but the stuff built in to windows is honestly more than enough for a casual user. If things have progressed beyond that, they need professional help anyways.

atoav 5y ago
There is this class of tech outlets for "advanced" computer users (the kind which comes with CDs and USB drives full of "useful" software) which is pure snake oil marketing material. The truth is, that with the right behaviour you probably don't need any AV product. Don't click on weird links, use adblockers, don't open weird documents especially when they come via mail, keep your OS and software up to date, etc. For all the other stuff (zero days) AV software won't help you and in fact AV software will often even increase the attack surface of your system (remote code execution via AV-buffer overflow is not a rare thing to happen). On my Windows machines I am not using AV software since roughly a decade and I have not had a single issue. Telling people that they can click around carefree if only they have an AV software installed is irresponsible IMO. AV software is not a substitute for education.

ChrisSD 5y ago

Anti-malware software is almost universally terrible. My advice is to use the one that comes with Windows (aka Windows Defender). It's not perfect but it's the least worst option. Whatever you do, don't use McAfee. And definitely don't use some other random software you found online no matter what the reviews say. This type of software is always incredibly invasive. There is almost zero reason to give this much power over your system to another third party.

1337shadow 5y ago
In case you already have McAfee, you can use this tutorial by John McAfee himself to remove it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgf5PaBzyg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgf5PaBzyg
pram 5y ago
Yes I used Bitdefender for awhile, which was fine, and then they started installing stuff like VPN clients and weird browser extensions. I literally paid for it too, but not anymore. Total shady bullshit.
varnaud 5y ago
I removed Avira antivirus from my grandma low spec laptop and switched to the builtin Windows one. My suspicious was that it was constantly scanning the HDD and running a bunch of processes that overworked the laptop limited capacities. Boot to Firefox was improved by at least 30 seconds, navigating the file explorer felt much smoother and security was probably improved as well. For home users, I don't see any reasons to use a third party antivirus nowadays.
formerly_proven 5y ago
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiniP-kUkAE36aI?format=jpg&name=900x900 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiniP-kUkAE36aI?format=jpg&name=... AVs and other "security products" massively increase attack surface (sometimes by literally disabling protections that the OS itself has, but usually by just being buggy and insecure in itself and doing things in obviously bad and insecure ways to be faster) and have been leveraged in so many attacks now that it's truly remarkable that there is zero change in how people think about it.

cryptica 5y ago

I haven't used antivirus software in over a decade. I consider them to be viruses themselves. Most of them are written by ex-hackers. My solution is to use Linux and to only download files I trust.

dspillett 5y ago
> and to only download files I trust That works for those of us with a bit of knowledge. Unfortunately it is hard for those who don't have time to, or don't want to, build that experience. How do they know what can and can't be trusted? Many bad downloads should be obvious to even a half-wit (and I'm not above unsympathetically sniggering when someone I know falls for them) but many are more clever, or difficult to avoid once you've fallen in to the trap. > use Linux That won't protect the inexperienced user from everything, by any measure.
adxl 5y ago
And if you must run windows for some specific program then run it on Linux in VirtualBox and only run that program. When finished with the program (tax software and other related for me) shut down VirtualBox. Keep snapshots and backups of your work from VirtualBox and you will most likely have no problems.

cooper45 5y ago

Thanks for sharing.I found a lot of interesting information here. A really good post, very thankful and hopeful that you will write many more posts like this one. https://www.myloweslife.life/ https://www.myloweslife.life/

Macha 5y ago

> As if to emphasize the cultural differences between America and Romania, Bitdefender’s website reportedly prevents people from canceling auto-renew. To quote one user’s reaction, !? A great many US products and services have similar approachs. Think ISPs, gyms, the NYT, etc. I agree the behaviour is scummy, but no need single out Romania for it.

willis936 5y ago
There is a difference between a contractual agreement to use a service for a period of time and just pulling money out without such a contract or any other form of consent. That is to say: one is legal in the US and the other is not.
- Macha 5y ago
  I'm sure NYT and Bitdefender both have "the contract auto-renews unless explicitly cancelled" in their terms. The only place NYT allows you to cancel online is California, because of relatively recent regulation. Elsewhere you need to contact their retention department. I'm really not seeing the difference between their actions.

juancn 5y ago

Most third-party antiviruses cause more problems than viruses do in my experience. They tend to hook into system calls and slow down the computer in hard to diagnose ways. Sometimes they don't implement the hooks correctly and cause subtle bugs on top of the slowdown. I only use built in ones (such as Windows defender) which at least have the pushback of some other teams that own the APIs that are intercepted and tend to strike a better balance.