Best windows vista anti-virus

[Vistapocalypse]

3 hours ago, VistaEX said:

I Got Microsoft Securety Essentials To Work On Vista! It Works Perfectly

Connection failed looks rather imperfect.

[legacyfan]

now it says its up to date

Edited March 21, 2021 by VistaEX

[Vistapocalypse]

12 hours ago, VistaEX said:

Now It Says Its Up To Date This Is Strange?

Not strange if (1) SHA-2 support is installed and (2) you have manually installed definition updates. See my July 2019 post, especially the Edit and screenshot, for another imperfection that worried me. (Avast definitions do not require SHA-2 support or manual installation.)

[Vistapocalypse]

@ScrapMechanicFan2016 has posted in the lengthy Extended Kernel  thread, “Webroot Secure Anywhere requires the SHA-2 updates...” (That is also true of ESET, or soon will be.) I wonder what version of Webroot he is using with extended kernel, and what was the last version to officially support Windows Vista? I can see that Webroot System Requirements no longer include Vista, and there is a download for the final XP-compatible release, which would no doubt work on vanilla Vista but wasn’t necessarily the last version to support Vista. We try to keep track of such details in the thread Last versions of software for Windows Vista.

[Sergiaws]

I think Avast and similar Anti-malware softwares have a lot of unnecessary features, so I use ClamWin in Windows XP because I don't want my system to be slow.

[Vistapocalypse]

1 hour ago, Sergiaws said:

I think Avast and similar Anti-malware softwares have a lot of unnecessary features, so I use ClamWin in Windows XP because I don't want my system to be slow.

I never used ClamWin because it has no real-time protection, which I regard as a necessary feature and is in fact the only feature that ever saved me from a serious online threat. Of course real-time protection uses some system resources, but those are generally not as scarce for systems running Vista or newer as they were in the XP era.

[Sergiaws]

I agree with you, however, despite that ClamWin don-t have Real time protection, you can add it using ClamSentinel. I think it also saved me from running infected files.

[lmacri]

On 1/14/2021 at 1:16 PM, winvispixp said:

What's "the best" anti-virus program that is compatible with windows vista including the extended kernel in your opinion and why? (Free and paid options, preferably free ofc )

Hi winvispixp:

You might be interested in reading ITMA's 14-Jan-2021 thread Security Software for Windows Vista? in the Norton forum.  That thread offers suggestions for a few security programs with real-time protection that still receive regular virus definition updates and are compatible with Win XP and Vista, including the legacy Norton Security v22.15.x, the legacy Malwarebytes Premium v3.5.1, the legacy Avast/AVG Antivirus Free v18.8, the legacy Kaspersky v18.0/v19.0 (Free and paid products, v18.0 for older CPUs that do not support SSE2; v19.0 for Pentium III or newer CPUs that support SSE2), and Panda Security's current line of Panda Dome products.  I don't believe the legacy Norton products or current Panda Dome products have been mentioned in this thread yet.

As noted <here> in ITMA's thread, ESET is currently supporting Win XP and Vista, but that support will likely end on 15-Apr-2021 when their SHA-1 code signing certificates expire.

Also note that when ITMA's thread started on 14-Jan-2021 Norton was originally planning to end support for Win XP and Vista on 28-Feb-2021, but the company reversed that decision (see Norton employee Gayathri_R's 08-Mar-2020 announcement Maintenance Mode for Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows 7 SP0 for Norton Security Software) and continues to support these older operating systems.  I used Norton Security Deluxe v22.15.x for several years on my "plain vanilla" Vista SP2 machine (patched to Vista SP2 end of support, no Win Server 2008 updates or extended kernel) and was very happy with the protection it offered, but I switched to Malwarebytes Premium v3.5.1 a few years ago after I purchased a Win 10 laptop. Malwarebytes Premium v3.5.1 is a good choice for my Vista SP2 machine because I only use it on occasion as a test machine so it's rarely connected to the internet these days, and because I had a spare perpetual / lifetime license for Malwarebytes Premium (not available for purchase since 2014) that does not require me to pay an annual subscription.
----------
32-bit Vista Home Premium SP2 * Firefox ESR v52.9.0 * Malwarebytes Premium v3.5.1-1.0.365
HP Pavilion dv6835ca, Intel Core2Duo T5550 @ 1.83 GHz CPU, 3 GB RAM, Western Digital Scorpio WD2500BEVS 256 GB SATA HD, NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS

[i430VX]

1 hour ago, lmacri said:

for Pentium III or newer CPUs that support SSE2

Pentium III does not support SSE2. Pentium 4 is the first to do so.

[Vistapocalypse]

OP winvispixp already posted March 6 that Kaspersky Free 18.0.0.405 seems to be working fine now. One wonders why an MSFN member running Vista x64 with extended kernel would need to consult the Norton forum for advice? 

Norton may have “reversed” (or delayed?) its decision to cut off definition updates for the “maintenance mode” version this month, but I certainly would not suggest buying Norton with Vista or XP in mind now! I actually did try Panda six years ago, as a result of which I had to reinstall Vista, which is why I never suggest it. One of the replies to my ESET question states that Panda does not use dll modules, hence does not require SHA-2. An administrator said ESET “might work” if SHA-2 support has been installed on Vista, but ESET isn’t free so I’m not inclined to test it myself. The final version to support Vista was 12.2.30.

[Vistapocalypse]

On 3/22/2021 at 11:34 AM, Vistapocalypse said:

@ScrapMechanicFan2016 has posted in the lengthy Extended Kernel  thread, “Webroot Secure Anywhere requires the SHA-2 updates...”

Found some more information about that:

https://answers.webroot.com/Webroot/ukp.aspx?pid=17&app=vw&vw=1&solutionid=3565&t=Windows-XPServer-2003-digital-signature-FAQ

Web-root actually seems aware that Vista can support SHA-256 if “the latest” updates are installed.

Edited October 3, 2022 by Vistapocalypse
fix broken link

[AndrewSM36]

On 3/22/2021 at 11:34 AM, Vistapocalypse said:

@ScrapMechanicFan2016 has posted in the lengthy Extended Kernel  thread, “Webroot Secure Anywhere requires the SHA-2 updates...” (That is also true of ESET, or soon will be.) I wonder what version of Webroot he is using with extended kernel, and what was the last version to officially support Windows Vista? I can see that Webroot System Requirements no longer include Vista, and there is a download for the final XP-compatible release, which would no doubt work on vanilla Vista but wasn’t necessarily the last version to support Vista. We try to keep track of such details in the thread Last versions of software for Windows Vista.

wait when did they stop? im on webroot secure anywhere 9.0.29.62 which happens to be the same version installed on my windows 8,1 install on my main. im typing this from my Dell XPS Studio which is running Windows Vista Home Premium. my main has windows vista business, windows 7 professional, and windows 8.1 pro. Vista has the extended kernel on the main. but not here. meaning afaik windows vista is still supported by Webroot. yes i installed the sha2 updates. but i havent installed the extended kernel on this laptop. also my windows XP machine may be running the latest too. i will check later. that XP install hasnt had updates at all. except for Unofficial Service Pack 4
FINAL EDIT> just checked. and nope. but it isnt far behind. it is 9.0.27.49 on XP... meaning now i know what is the latest for XP... i didnt know before...

Edited March 26, 2021 by ScrapMechanicFan2016
yes i know im late

[Vistapocalypse]

On 3/25/2021 at 7:22 PM, ScrapMechanicFan2016 said:

wait when did they stop? im on webroot secure anywhere 9.0.29.62 which happens to be the same version installed on my windows 8,1 install on my main. im typing this from my Dell XPS Studio which is running Windows Vista Home Premium. my main has windows vista business, windows 7 professional, and windows 8.1 pro. Vista has the extended kernel on the main. but not here. meaning afaik windows vista is still supported by Webroot. yes i installed the sha2 updates....it is 9.0.27.49 on XP...

Thanks for posting! I’m not a Webroot user and not sure exactly when they posted system requirements listing nothing older than Windows 7, but it must have been rather recently. Good to know that 9.0.29.62 works on Windows 6.0.6003 with or without extended kernel! If you are registered at the Webroot Community, by all means post a question there about support for XP/Vista. As you probably know, there is no known way to install SHA-2 support on XP. Webroot has reportedly been signed with SHA-2 exclusively since 9.0.27.64. “However, installation to Windows XP and Server 2003 is still possible using installers that are only signed with SHA-256.” The version on your XP system dates back to late 2019. Are its definitions being updated without problems?

Edited October 3, 2022 by Vistapocalypse
fix broken link

[AndrewSM36]

On 3/25/2021 at 10:25 PM, Vistapocalypse said:

Thanks for posting! I’m not a Webroot user and not sure exactly when they posted system requirements listing nothing older than Windows 7, but it must have been rather recently. Good to know that 9.0.29.62 works on Windows 6.0.6003 with or without extended kernel! If you are registered at the Webroot Community, by all means post a question there about support for XP/Vista. As you probably know, there is no known way to install SHA-2 support on XP. Webroot has reportedly been signed with SHA-2 exclusively since 9.0.27.64. “However, installation to Windows XP and Server 2003 is still possible using installers that are only signed with SHA-256.” The version on your XP system dates back to late 2019. Are its definitions being updated without problems?

appearently webroot's security definitions are "in the cloud"(you can see this if you click the gear icon on the "my account" section. go to "about SecureAnywhere" and click check for software updates. XP's version of SecureAnywhere also has this same messagebox, but the titlebar text is slightly different) so i dont think security definitions are an issue for XP+.

Edited November 18, 2022 by AndrewSM36
missing "

[Vistapocalypse]

You’re answering a question that I asked 18 months ago!? Thanks. It’s funny that Imacri couldn’t resist the compulsion to ask you a question that was already answered in this thread. Imacri never installed any Server 2008 updates and formerly warned others against it, but “no SHA-2 support” now means “no new software.” You sure do change your screen name often. Thanks again!