Open Source Anti Virus



opensourceav?
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
Is using an open souce antivirus program, such as ClamWin, a bad idea for a
small business? Our workstations currently run Norton, which is a pain to
update as all the computers expire at different times. Although ClamWin
doesn't have real time protection, we haven't had many virus problems in the
past, and I thought a weekly scan from the open source antivirus would be
sufficient. Any thoughts/suggestions?

Shenan Stanley
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
opensourceav? wrote:
> Is using an open souce antivirus program, such as ClamWin, a bad idea
> for a small business? Our workstations currently run Norton, which is
> a pain to update as all the computers expire at different times.
> Although ClamWin doesn't have real time protection, we haven't had
> many virus problems in the past, and I thought a weekly scan from the
> open source antivirus would be sufficient. Any thoughts/suggestions?

Perhaps you should invest in Symantec AV Enterprise..
Then you can manage via a server.

However, for the most part - you can manage Norton AV pretty automatically -
as it will get its updates daily (if you set it) empty its quarantine as
often as you set it automatically and just about everything else. I realize
your virus definitions subscriptions may now be running outat different
times, but if you have a little scripting ability, you could setup a script
to download and place the newest definitions in the correct place...

You could upgrade all of your systems at once, this would make the
management of subscriptions much simpler.

Grisoft AVG has some decent 2-5 SoHo licenses...

The statement about ClamWin that would deter me...

"Please note that ClamWin Free Antivirus does not include an on-access
real-time scanner, that is, you need to manually scan a file in order to
detect a virus."

A weekly scan that a user could cancel or that may not occur or that may
occur 6 days after infection and total burn-down.... Sounds like an
invitation for trouble. heh

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--

Crouchie1998
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
If you buy Synmatec Antivirus 9 Corporate Edition then you can have an
automated service for updating because you have a client/server install

You could have 10, 000 workstations with client antivirus (managed) & they
will all be kept up-to-date automatically.

Crouchie1998
BA (HONS) MCP MCSE

Malke
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
opensourceav? wrote:

> Is using an open souce antivirus program, such as ClamWin, a bad idea
> for a small business? Our workstations currently run Norton, which is
> a pain to update as all the computers expire at different times.
> Although ClamWin doesn't have real time protection, we haven't had
> many virus problems in the past, and I thought a weekly scan from the
> open source antivirus would be sufficient. Any thoughts/suggestions?

It's not a good idea to use an AV that doesn't support real-time
protection. Look at something like F-Prot instead, which is reasonable
and good. You don't say the exact size of your business and whether you
have a domain, and that does make a difference. With a domain, you can
user a server-based AV. Several other posters have mentioned Symantec
Corporate, which is good but expensive. If cost is an issue, look
elsewhere, but for Windows machines it is crucial that you have
real-time protection. You've got your priorities regarding the
scans/real-time exactly reversed from what they ought to be.

Malke
--
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic!"
MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User

Knox
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
"Malke" <invalid@not-real.com> wrote in message
news:e6w4pSgXFHA.4032@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> opensourceav? wrote:
>
>> Is using an open souce antivirus program, such as ClamWin, a bad idea
>> for a small business? Our workstations currently run Norton, which is
>> a pain to update as all the computers expire at different times.
>> Although ClamWin doesn't have real time protection, we haven't had
>> many virus problems in the past, and I thought a weekly scan from the
>> open source antivirus would be sufficient. Any thoughts/suggestions?
>
> It's not a good idea to use an AV that doesn't support real-time
> protection. Look at something like F-Prot instead, which is reasonable
> and good. You don't say the exact size of your business and whether you
> have a domain, and that does make a difference. With a domain, you can
> user a server-based AV. Several other posters have mentioned Symantec
> Corporate, which is good but expensive. If cost is an issue, look
> elsewhere, but for Windows machines it is crucial that you have
> real-time protection. You've got your priorities regarding the
> scans/real-time exactly reversed from what they ought to be.
>
> Malke
> --
> Elephant Boy Computers
> www.elephantboycomputers.com
> "Don't Panic!"
> MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User

I disagree that it is necessary to have real-time virus protection PROVIDED
that your users don't run as administrator. In my small business of 25-30
computers, we scan weekly and have no real time protection.

Email exposure is limited because by default Outlook doesn't let users open
dangerous attachments. We reduce risk of web viruses by only allowing java
script on the 30 or 40 websites that we trust. We don't allow any websites
to download active X. But if all that fails, users don't run as
administrators. They can't install viruses even if they want to. See
http://nonadmin.editme.com/ for how to do this and why to do this.

Knox

Malke
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
Knox wrote:

>
> "Malke" <invalid@not-real.com> wrote in message
> news:e6w4pSgXFHA.4032@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> opensourceav? wrote:
>>
>>> Is using an open souce antivirus program, such as ClamWin, a bad
>>> idea for a small business? Our workstations currently run Norton,
>>> which is a pain to update as all the computers expire at different
>>> times. Although ClamWin doesn't have real time protection, we
>>> haven't had many virus problems in the past, and I thought a weekly
>>> scan from the open source antivirus would be sufficient. Any
>>> thoughts/suggestions?
>>
>> It's not a good idea to use an AV that doesn't support real-time
>> protection. Look at something like F-Prot instead, which is
>> reasonable and good. You don't say the exact size of your business
>> and whether you have a domain, and that does make a difference. With
>> a domain, you can user a server-based AV. Several other posters have
>> mentioned Symantec Corporate, which is good but expensive. If cost is
>> an issue, look elsewhere, but for Windows machines it is crucial that
>> you have real-time protection. You've got your priorities regarding
>> the scans/real-time exactly reversed from what they ought to be.
>>
>> Malke
>> --
>> Elephant Boy Computers
>> www.elephantboycomputers.com
>> "Don't Panic!"
>> MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
>
> I disagree that it is necessary to have real-time virus protection
> PROVIDED
> that your users don't run as administrator. In my small business of
> 25-30 computers, we scan weekly and have no real time protection.
>
> Email exposure is limited because by default Outlook doesn't let users
> open
> dangerous attachments. We reduce risk of web viruses by only allowing
> java
> script on the 30 or 40 websites that we trust. We don't allow any
> websites
> to download active X. But if all that fails, users don't run as
> administrators. They can't install viruses even if they want to. See
> http://nonadmin.editme.com/ for how to do this and why to do this.
>
> Knox

Then we must disagree to disagree. You sound like a savvy administrator
who has his network locked down tightly, but most small businesses (and
remember, we don't know the size of the OP's business) don't have
someone like you. For example, my small-business clients typically have
less than 10 computers, no IT at all, and lots of users who like to
open attachments, surf for pr0n, and download cr*p from Smiley Central.
Most of them do not even use a domain.

So I guess the answer to the OP's question is - "it depends".

Malke
--
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic!"
MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User

Malke
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
Malke wrote:

>
> Then we must disagree to disagree.

Oops. Sorry. I meant (obviously, I hope) "agree to disagree". Wouldn't
want you to think I was being rude.

Malke
--
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic!"
MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User

opensourceav?
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
We have about 15 workstations. When I said updating was a pain, I didn't
necessarily mean virus definitions, but instead the yearly subscription
status.

opensourceav?
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
Also, I need something that is moderately user-friendly to setup and manage
across a network...although I'm not sure if that's possible since IPs are
assigned dynamically.

opensourceav?
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
Why is it that F-Prot is so inexpensive compared to other AV solutions...are
there features that are missing?

"Malke" wrote:

> opensourceav? wrote:
>
> > Is using an open souce antivirus program, such as ClamWin, a bad idea
> > for a small business? Our workstations currently run Norton, which is
> > a pain to update as all the computers expire at different times.
> > Although ClamWin doesn't have real time protection, we haven't had
> > many virus problems in the past, and I thought a weekly scan from the
> > open source antivirus would be sufficient. Any thoughts/suggestions?
>
> It's not a good idea to use an AV that doesn't support real-time
> protection. Look at something like F-Prot instead, which is reasonable
> and good. You don't say the exact size of your business and whether you
> have a domain, and that does make a difference. With a domain, you can
> user a server-based AV. Several other posters have mentioned Symantec
> Corporate, which is good but expensive. If cost is an issue, look
> elsewhere, but for Windows machines it is crucial that you have
> real-time protection. You've got your priorities regarding the
> scans/real-time exactly reversed from what they ought to be.
>
> Malke
> --
> Elephant Boy Computers
> www.elephantboycomputers.com
> "Don't Panic!"
> MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
>

Shenan Stanley
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
opensourceav? wrote:
> Also, I need something that is moderately user-friendly to setup and
> manage across a network...although I'm not sure if that's possible
> since IPs are assigned dynamically.

It is if they are in a domain.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--

Knox
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
No problem...

I certainly agree with you about "...lots of users who like to
open attachments, surf for pr0n, and download cr*p from Smiley Central." I
assume that users will do the wrong thing, and that's why they can't be
administrators. Spyware, which in many ways is even more dangerous than
viruses, uses social engineering to get the users to install the malware.

Knox's law (with apologies to Murphy)

If a user can do the wrong thing, he will do the wrong thing.

I do understand about the size of the business and it can be frustrating to
run as non-admin. But it can also be frustrating to manage a bunch of
anti-virus and anti-spyware software as well.


Knox


"Malke" <invalid@not-real.com> wrote in message
news:eWpO$ghXFHA.1240@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Malke wrote:
>
>>
>> Then we must disagree to disagree.
>
> Oops. Sorry. I meant (obviously, I hope) "agree to disagree". Wouldn't
> want you to think I was being rude.
>
> Malke
> --
> Elephant Boy Computers
> www.elephantboycomputers.com
> "Don't Panic!"
> MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User

S. Pidgorny
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
I used to use it - it's a good antivirus with no apparent drawbacks.

--
Svyatoslav Pidgorny, MS MVP - Security, MCSE
-= F1 is the key =-

"opensourceav?" <opensourceav@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B297F8A0-4410-427F-B2E0-2519C40C5EF7@microsoft.com...
> Why is it that F-Prot is so inexpensive compared to other AV
solutions...are
> there features that are missing?

Malke
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
Shenan Stanley wrote:

> opensourceav? wrote:
>> Also, I need something that is moderately user-friendly to setup and
>> manage across a network...although I'm not sure if that's possible
>> since IPs are assigned dynamically.
>
> It is if they are in a domain.
>
If you do not have a domain with 15 workstations, you should. Then you
can use server-client av and set up your network properly, as Mr. Knox
has so eloquently described.

Malke
--
MS-MVP Windows User/Shell
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic"

karen
07-09-2005, 10:52 PM
"opensourceav?" <opensourceav@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B297F8A0-4410-427F-B2E0-2519C40C5EF7@microsoft.com...
> Why is it that F-Prot is so inexpensive compared to other AV
> solutions...are
> there features that are missing?
>
Our company uses it with maybe 40 or 50+ computers. It seems to work fine,
and the pretty much daily updates are easy. Plus, we're allowed to use it
at home, although I don't know if that is a standard part of the license or
an additional cost. It doesn't interfere with other software (Visual C++)
like Norton did.

-karen


Open Source Anti Virus