Security question

[mvd]

I currently run Kaspersky Internet Security (KIS 2009) because of the concerns I have in regards to American computer security companies (like Symantec/Norton) and the NSA. But Russia also isn't in great political shape. I'm not a Russian citizen, but I suppose they could still spy on Americans, especially now. Which do these do think would be safest to use if the government spying through the security program is one of my concerns?

[ret5hd]

1. Apple

:popcorn:

[mvd]

2. I'd like to try one, but can't afford it

:-)

[HCE SuiGeneris]

3. Avast AV with a good firewall, SpywareBlaster in background, and Firefox 3 browser.

[Posteritatis]

5. I've been very happy with Avast myself (nt)

[DCKit]

10. Me three (Avast).

But how can you tell if you're being spied on? AFIK, you can't.

[dysfunctional press]

11. avast is definitely the way to go. ditto firefox. but i use ad-aware as the other peg.

nt

[Wickerman]

4. I like Eset's NOD32

http://www.eset.com/

Very light, don't really notice it on the system, yet it gets high marks in reliability:

Antivirus protection is spelled "NOD32." Built on the award-winning ThreatSense® engine, ESET NOD32 Antivirus software proactively detects and eliminates more viruses, trojans, worms, adware, spyware, phishing, rootkits and other Internet threats than any program available.

It won't prevent you from feeling slimely and like you need a shower if you track a troll back to Freeperland, but at least you won't get the dreaded Palin virus...

[mvd]

6. And that's Eastern European

Which would be good for the paranoid like me. It also scores well. :hi:

[mvd]

7. For those saying Norton or McAfee would be best, why?

Is it because you use it and like it, or because you really trust American companies more?

[bemildred]

8. If you want real security, against spying, you have to encrypt.

Without encryption, you can be read.

[mvd]

9. Oh yes, extra tools help

I use a key-scrambler extension for Firefox, and am thinking about an all purpose program. And I guess the NSA could get in if they really wanted to. But I still don't want my program to facilitate spying or not detect their spyware.

[bemildred]

12. Well, that's correct.

But you can be perfectly secure in the sense of not allowing remote viewing of your machine, poking around in your file system or the like, and still have all traffic coming and going from your machine readable on the net.

If the issue is preventing "remote viewing" and you are serious about it, you have to go open source and know internet protocols and read the code. Or trust somebody.

FWIW, I use AVG and am quite happy with it. I never encrypt anything because AFAIK I have nothing to hide and not much to lose. If I ran servers of any sort, I'd have to do a lot more investigation.

[mvd]

13. Also have nothing to hide, but until Obama gets in and..

fixes the system to where it was, I'll be wary.

[bemildred]

14. Wary is good. nt

[foo_bar]

15. there's no great answer to "who watches the watcher?"

Security "suites" in general tend to be humongous resource pigs that try to compensate for Windows' lack of reality testing (Microsoft suffers a similar corporate malady to the Bush admin, no one can tell management the truth (without losing their jobs)). But it isn't like Eastern Europe is especially sheltered from US influence, so if privacy from espionage is the problem your best bet is to download the geekiest sounding Linux distribution and find a teenager to install it on your boot drive; any "security" software on Windoze is lipstick on a pig IMO (and I mostly live/work in the Microsloth world, so this isn't an elitist MacOS rant).

[bemildred]

16. Yah.

I have FreeBSD setup to have NO open ports. Viruses are not much of a problem in BSD. But I don't use it much because I don't care. I mostly run Win98SE. I won't run most "security suites" because they are like going to bondage and discipline camp, but I run a firewall on my DSL router and free anti-virus software (AVG).