Read on.....
Is there a thing such as the perfect anti-virus or security programme for personal computers? It’s a question we often hear today. The almost uncontrollable invasion of viruses and threats of all sorts is making users more concerned than ever about the safety of their machines and the information stored on them.
Certainly the infamous bird flu and the current cholera outbreak in Zimbabwe are frightening diseases. But in a certain way these biological, tangible plagues may eventually prove to be more controllable than the virtual type. Besides, over the last few years, the world already has seen several cases of computer viral infections or large scale hacking that have affected hundred of thousands systems, including some that were believed well protected.
Just this week, Facebook community’s 120 million users have been warned that Koobface, a virus designed to get hold of sensitive information like credit card details may strike their accounts.
There are three major anti-virus and Internet security applications: Symantec-Norton, Kaspersky and McAfee. Microsoft also supplies Defender, a complementary product that is an excellent protection against one specific form of threat: spyware.
Wikipedia defines spyware as “computer software that is installed surreptitiously on a personal computer to intercept or take partial control over the user’s interaction with the computer, without the user’s informed consent”. Spyware therefore does not cause any damage to user’s files. It “merely” steals information from your data and slows down your computer in an annoying way.
As one would expect it, it is impossible to say which of Symantec, McAfee or Kaspersky constitutes the perfect protection, or is able to catch all viruses. All these programmes work according to heuristic methods that provide a “solution that is reasonably close to the best possible answer”. In plain English, none is guaranteed to provide a 100 per cent protection against existing threats. Kaspersky is the newest of all three products and has quickly gained wide popularity.
Experts insist saying that in some instances there were viruses that Kaspersky was able to catch and that Symantec could not - and vice versa of course - which usually prompts users to ask if it wouldn’t be better therefore to have both applications installed at the same time, one complementing the other. But it does not work this way, and installing two different anti-virus programmes often creates conflicts and slows down the computer significantly. It is not recommended practice.
In addition to what anti-virus and Internet security products come with, Microsoft’s Windows has a built-in software-based firewall module that provides a reasonable level of protection against a large number of illegal intrusions to your computer.
The industry also provides hardware, physical firewalls. This is electronic digital equipment that can be installed on a network and that can be programmed to ensure various levels of protection against external intrusions.
The firewall concept is not a simple one. Setting up a physical firewall is not a layman’s task and should be left to professionals. For those who think that simple anti-virus software is not enough, hardware firewalls are the best solution, though they are not easy to manage.
Users are left with an unpleasant choice: to have just one anti-virus installed on their machine and that they can manage in a relatively easy manner, but knowing that it only provides about 95 per cent protection, or to go to extremes with the acquisition of a physical firewall but that makes the entire operation very heavy and expensive to manage. For the time being, there is nothing in between.
No comments:
Post a Comment