Which Antiviruses are Known for a Fact to be Working on XP SP3 as of 2019?

[Cocodile]

20 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

You can download so called eicar test files to test antivirus programs. Use Google and you will find them!

According to EICAR's specification, the antivirus detects the test file only if it starts with the 68-byte test string and is not more than 128 bytes long. As a result, antiviruses are not expected to raise an alarm on some other document containing the test string.^[13] The test file can still be used for some malicious purposes, exploiting the reaction from the antivirus software

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EICAR_test_file

So looks like no real time test ?

[UCyborg]

This thread sure has a lot of activity. Can't say I can tell from the texts here what makes folks use particular anti-virus. And what does it gain them, I mean, are you encountering viruses on the regular basis? I really don't know, it's been over a decade since I used an anti-virus. Back then it was mostly ESET NOD32 or ESET SmartSecurity. But I was mostly fighting with the anti-virus which liked to prevent certain legitimate executables from running. Besides being bitten by a virus once which was planted on the ClassicShell's official download source (place was hacked into) and which wasn't difficult to recover from, it just overwrote MBR and was supposed to show the message about being pwned when OS was supposed to boot, that part failed on my system and there was just a spade character. I could've avoided running it if I paid attention to the fact that the installer for this software was normally digitally signed. But using signed and unsigned stuff, this just didn't cross my mind back then.

Early years after XP release, getting internet connection for the first time, those times were stranger, there was one shared computer at home (who knows what others were clicking), Internet Explorer 6 was used at first and also I was much younger, so can't really say much about back then, I just remember computer had to be formatted in few days after getting the internet connection for the first time.

[AstroSkipper]

9 hours ago, Cocodile said:

According to EICAR's specification, the antivirus detects the test file only if it starts with the 68-byte test string and is not more than 128 bytes long. As a result, antiviruses are not expected to raise an alarm on some other document containing the test string.^[13] The test file can still be used for some malicious purposes, exploiting the reaction from the antivirus software

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EICAR_test_file

So looks like no real time test ?

My recommendation of the eicar test files was just what is well-known and easy to apply. To be honest, I usually do not test my antivirus programs. Only if something bad happens, or I have the impression that it is not working properly. The official test which are performed on a regular base are sufficient for me. Sometimes, you have to try a little trust to organisations like av-test.org or other institutes which do such tests for years or decades. 

Edited March 26, 2023 by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[AstroSkipper]

7 hours ago, UCyborg said:

This thread sure has a lot of activity. Can't say I can tell from the texts here what makes folks use particular anti-virus. And what does it gain them, I mean, are you encountering viruses on the regular basis? I really don't know, it's been over a decade since I used an anti-virus. Back then it was mostly ESET NOD32 or ESET SmartSecurity. But I was mostly fighting with the anti-virus which liked to prevent certain legitimate executables from running. Besides being bitten by a virus once which was planted on the ClassicShell's official download source (place was hacked into) and which wasn't difficult to recover from, it just overwrote MBR and was supposed to show the message about being pwned when OS was supposed to boot, that part failed on my system and there was just a spade character. I could've avoided running it if I paid attention to the fact that the installer for this software was normally digitally signed. But using signed and unsigned stuff, this just didn't cross my mind back then.

Early years after XP release, getting internet connection for the first time, those times were stranger, there was one shared computer at home (who knows what others were clicking), Internet Explorer 6 was used at first and also I was much younger, so can't really say much about back then, I just remember computer had to be formatted in few days after getting the internet connection for the first time.

Nobody knows where a malware, virus, trojan or whatever is waiting for them. It always makes sense to build up some protection, especially in an operating system as old as Windows XP. There are only a few antivirus programs left that support Windows XP. Therefore, such a thread here is of particular importance. At least, in my opinion. That's why I share my knowledge and experiences here. 

Edited March 26, 2023 by AstroSkipper

[mina7601]

8 hours ago, Cocodile said:

And what exactly did you expect ?

I expected it to protect me, like any antivirus.

8 hours ago, Cocodile said:

How many viruses you had at the same time ? It didn't catch them all ?

I had 2 viruses in a folder. Panda Dome showed me a notification saying that it deleted the 2 viruses, but when I checked the folder, they were still there.

[AstroSkipper]

18 minutes ago, mina7601 said:

I expected it to protect me, like any antivirus.

I had 2 viruses in a folder. Panda Dome showed me a notification saying that it deleted the 2 viruses, but when I checked the folder, they were still there.

I can't confirm that statement. I have just tested Panda Dome, and it checked a file that a lot of scanners think is malware. While checking it deleted that file immediately. So, no problems here. Good protection as expected.

[AstroSkipper]

45 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

1 hour ago, mina7601 said:

I expected it to protect me, like any antivirus.

I had 2 viruses in a folder. Panda Dome showed me a notification saying that it deleted the 2 viruses, but when I checked the folder, they were still there.

I can't confirm that statement. I have just tested Panda Dome, and it checked a file that a lot of scanners think is malware. While checking it deleted that file immediately. So, no problems here. Good protection as expected.

I performed a second test. I copied two malicious files and two clean files in one folder. Then I started a manual scan of this folder. Both malicious files were recognized and immediately deleted. 
Panda Dome works exactly as it should be.

I assume something is wrong on your side.

Edited March 26, 2023 by AstroSkipper

[Milkinis]

15 hours ago, mina7601 said:

I had 2 viruses in a folder. Panda Dome showed me a notification saying that it deleted the 2 viruses, but when I checked the folder, they were still there.

I did uninstall the crap PANDA DOME for that same reason.

not only was it slow but it's truly inefficient as far as security goes.

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177099-which-antiviruses-are-known-for-a-fact-to-be-working-on-xp-sp3-as-of-2019/page/31/#comment-1241103

 

[Cocodile]

20 hours ago, mina7601 said:

I expected it to protect me, like any antivirus.

I had 2 viruses in a folder. Panda Dome showed me a notification saying that it deleted the 2 viruses, but when I checked the folder, they were still there.

Proof ? 

 

4 hours ago, Milkinis said:

I did uninstall the crap PANDA DOME for that same reason.

not only was it slow but it's truly inefficient as far as security goes.

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177099-which-antiviruses-are-known-for-a-fact-to-be-working-on-xp-sp3-as-of-2019/page/31/#comment-1241103

 

Proof ?

[legacyfan]

1 hour ago, Milkinis said:

I did uninstall the crap PANDA DOME for that same reason.

not only was it slow but it's truly inefficient as far as security goes.

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177099-which-antiviruses-are-known-for-a-fact-to-be-working-on-xp-sp3-as-of-2019/page/31/#comment-1241103

 

ive never really had any issues with panda really accept for the random you need .net framework installed issue (which can be fixed by manually installing it)

[AstroSkipper]

16 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

17 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

17 hours ago, mina7601 said:

I expected it to protect me, like any antivirus.

I had 2 viruses in a folder. Panda Dome showed me a notification saying that it deleted the 2 viruses, but when I checked the folder, they were still there.

I can't confirm that statement. I have just tested Panda Dome, and it checked a file that a lot of scanners think is malware. While checking it deleted that file immediately. So, no problems here. Good protection as expected.

I performed a second test. I copied two malicious files and two clean files in one folder. Then I started a manual scan of this folder. Both malicious files were recognized and immediately deleted. 
Panda Dome works exactly as it should be.

I assume something is wrong on your side.

Panda Dome works reliable, as has been confirmed for years by AV-TEST and others.

37 minutes ago, Cocodile said:

17 hours ago, mina7601 said:

I expected it to protect me, like any antivirus.

I had 2 viruses in a folder. Panda Dome showed me a notification saying that it deleted the 2 viruses, but when I checked the folder, they were still there.

Proof ?

2 hours ago, Milkinis said:

I did uninstall the crap PANDA DOME for that same reason.

not only was it slow but it's truly inefficient as far as security goes.

https://msfn.org/board/topic/177099-which-antiviruses-are-known-for-a-fact-to-be-working-on-xp-sp3-as-of-2019/page/31/#comment-1241103

 

Proof ?

As already explained in previous posts, I have carried out my own tests with the result that Panda Dome detected and deleted my malware. However, we all know the real security problem is very often in front of the computer.   In such cases, a good program like Panda Dome can't help anymore, either.

Edited March 26, 2023 by AstroSkipper

[XPerceniol]

2 hours ago, legacyfan said:

ive never really had any issues with panda really accept for the random you need .net framework installed issue (which can be fixed by manually installing it)

Yeah, I don't have net framework installed because its too insecure and my systems are crippled. I did used to use Panda maybe years ago before these antivirus programs starting to take over the whole system and I only use 'on-demand' scanners now. I keep things pretty tight though and don't visit suspicious sites and never download attachments anymore even pictures could have secret malicious code.

[AstroSkipper]

1 hour ago, XPerceniol said:

I don't have net framework installed because its too insecure and my systems are crippled.

I have installed all .Net-Framework packages fronm 1.0 to 4.0 including all security patches in my system. It's not more insecure as Windows XP itself. Truth be told, several programs as for example Panda Dome need .Net-Framework in one of these versions. Without them such programs won't work. So, be aware of this fact when installing new software! 

Edited March 26, 2023 by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[mina7601]

@AstroSkipper Check your message inbox. I will send you a message with a link to the files I tested with Panda Dome in just a moment.

[Cocodile]

7 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

Panda Dome works reliable, as has been confirmed for years by AV-TEST and others.

As already explained in previous posts, I have carried out my own tests with the result that Panda Dome detected and deleted my malware. However, we all know the real security problem is very often in front of the computer.   In such cases, a good program like Panda Dome can't help anymore, either.

This is what I've been saying ! They showed us no proof.

= no screencaps, nothing. 

Edited March 26, 2023 by Cocodile
addition