[deXter]

Same here - I still don't use any antivirus, but would recommend Windows Defender for normal home users - it does a fairly decent job and rates favorably on av-comparatives tests. For power/heavy users however, I still recommend ESET's NOD32 due to it's scanning speed, detection rates and low resource impact. If you've got say millions of files you want to scan then stay away from Windows Defender / System Center Endpoint Protection. At work, we have a file server with 1.2 billion files and Windows Defender (SCEP) would take over 10 days to do a full scan - it seems that it doesn't store hashes of scanned files, so when you do a scheduled scan, it still scans files that haven't been touched in years, which is very inefficient. Plus it takes ages to scan archives. I could write an entire essay on how Defender/SCEP is horrible choice for a large organisation, but that's for a separate post.... +1 for Defender + MalwareBytes - great combo! However I wouldn't recommend or trust Comodo any longer, after their systems were breached and their SSL certs were compromised... See: https://bravatek.com/comodo-certificate-hack-it-gets-worse/ --- On an unrelated note, I'm surprised this topic is still active and not locked down. This is my first post here after 6 years, lol.

for me not. Ms removed all important options and over simplified it so much, that the program is useless. MSE is so terrible slow and slowdown Windows too much. So, what *do* you recommend?

Deep Freeze isn't indestructible. There are a few known hacks for it that still work, and I know for a fact that the author of one of the hacks still works on it and releases new versions regularly. But even if your copy of Deep Freeze remains unhacked, the problem remains that it won't stop a virus from running on your PC and spreading to other media, like USB drives or the network. Of course, when you reboot everything is back to its defaults on *your* PC, but in that session the virus could create havoc - harvest email address and mail itself to your contacts, or in a worst case scenario - log whatever you're doing and silently report it back to its creator (thus capturing your credit card numbers, bank account details, passwords etc). Then there are browser based attacks like XSS, that don't even bother infecting your PC - they would just run in your browser and you would never realize it. The browser itself might have vulnerabilities that might allow thirdparties to access your files. And don't forget Flash - probably one of the most vulnerable piece of software in your PC. Thus your PC can never be indestructible - and let's not forget two main reasons - 1) You're running Windows. 2) You're human, afterall.

Avira is a good choice - it's one of the top AVs out there, regardless of being free. Take a look at the reports on av-comparatives.com for detailed info. I personally install Avira on every malware-infected PC I fix (must have installed in ~50 PCs so far) and have got good results overall.

Not entirely true, there's ISO Master http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Desktop-Environment/File-managers/ISO-Master-16676.shtml Ok, so its for Linux but you could simply run a Linux distro under VirtualBox and you'd still get a free, legit solution to the ISO editing problem. Besides, Linux has quite a few handy stuff too other than ISO Master.

Have you tried TeraCopy 2.2b2? http://blog.codesector.com/2010/09/14/teracopy-2-2-beta-2/ Also, I would recommend a creating a system restore point first, incase you face the same issue again. Btw, you do realise that this is a three year old thread right? o.o

You can get a virus even if you don't visit "social networking" websites or download seedy stuff - for example, due to vulnerabilities in the OS (case in point: the Blaster Worm). And with Windows, you can bet there are always a couple of good undiscovered exploits.. Anyways, Microsoft has finally come out with a decent FREE AntiVirus, that's even better than AVG (according to some test sites). I've used it personally and it managed to find and remove all the malware I could throw at it. (Not that it means anything, except that it works!). Of course, it's still no Kaspersky or NOD32 but hey it works and is a pretty decent and viable option for those who don't want to pay. Pair it up with a decent freeware firewall, make sure your OS is patched regularly, practice safe computing habits and one should be decently protected against such threats.

That's not true. Considering that a majority of people will go for the freeware versions of firewalls, both Outpost and Comodo are better than OA. Outpost is better than Comodo because there's no garbage in the install, no toolbars in their installer. I'm at the point where I'd pick Outpost over Comodo due to the issues that Comodo has been trying to downplay. Issuing security certificates to malicious websites for one. Another is the constant toolbars in their Firewall installer. Softpedia has removed Comodo completely due to legal threats by Comodo because Softpedia called Comodo's products adware. Their 100% Clean award means you should be able to click through an install without worry of toolbars, malware or any other garbage. That still doesn't change the fact that Comodo can protect against more threats than Outpost. Source?

I'm sorry, but Outpost isn't as good as Online Armor or Comodo. http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive...nge/results.php -- I guess the problem with NOD32 is that they're very selective about adding new malware signatures to their database, because for them performance comes first - they tend to ignore the rarer ones and prefer ones that could be tweaked into the heuristics. As a result, some malware does slip by and this is what causes some people to believe that NOD32 isn't good. But it's good because the signature updates aren't bloated (like McAfee), the performance isn't degraded with each update and more importantly, it means lesser false-positives (unlike Avira). Another issue with NOD32 is that it's not that great at cleaning an already infected system/files. So if you have some infected documents, chances are NOD32 will either delete them altogether or not do a very good job at it. (Kaspersky and McAfee are quite good at disinfection). NOD32 especially has trouble with some variants of Vundo and similar malware - of course, there are other tools/methods to fix Vundo and such, but that's another reason why some people dislike NOD32.