The policies can really lock down all domain client PC's if required, but the config can get complex. We have support with Kaspersky via a UK reseller here and whenever I query anything with them they are prompt to respond and fix (if its needed). We are using the very latest Kaspersky Endpoint (KSC 10, KAV 10 for Windows SP2) and have no issues. If you find a product that has a good history and reputation for both detection and stability, and the price is right, go with it. Does it cause more problems than it solves? An antivirus that causes big performance problems and frequent crashes is worse than no antivirus at all, because it's destroying productivity every day. A long history of previous failures is the best predictor of future failuresĢ. Does it have a HISTORY of failing to detect and/or ameliorate new infections as they arise? There's no way to know if any product will stop some future malware, all we can do is play the odds.
If you have terrible antivirus but great policies andĪlert users, you're a lot safer than someone with awesome antivirus andĬhoosing an antivirus boils down to two things:ġ. The single biggest factor in avoiding infection is user awareness,įollowed by basic security practices, then antivirus comes in somewhere Every product has false positives and false negatives, and for every person who reports that they've never had an infection with product X, there's another person who had a terrible disaster where product X failed to protect them. Plus 1 for Windows Defender over that, especially if you're running the latest version of Win 10.Īnecdotal evidence is useless when evaluating antivirus products. Or have you guys all forgotten about this? I wouldn't trust Webroot with a 1,000 mile pole, ever again.
0 kommentar(er)
