This seems like some political BS from over here. As a long-term happy Kaspersky user this also is a PITA. I know it's distasteful to some just because it's the Ruskies, but dammit it worked great.

Know there are several threads here where VPN and antivirus options are discussed, will go find those. I never mind paying for a decent product, but guess our fearless leader is protecting us from;

quote:

....risk the country's economic security and public health, resulting in injuries or loss of life.”

Biden Bans Kaspersky Software, Gives Users 100 Days To Find Alternative

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
Know there are several threads here where VPN and antivirus options are discussed, will go find those.

In a nutshell: For a home user, the built-in Windows Defender is all you need for active antivirus defense. Just keep it updated, and as always, be smart about not clicking sketchy links or opening unknown email attachments.

If you want another layer of safety net for extra peace of mind, you can run a Malwarebytes scan every now and then. But you don't need to double-up on active antivirus programs running 24/7.

Both are free.

DoD banned Kaspersky a while ago. Apparently, there is a link between the Russian Government and/or Vlad the Emailer and Kaspersky.

I use AVG for my home computer, it's actually Czech IIRC. It' not too annoying.

I used to use McAfee, but it ate up so much resources I dumped it.

Yeah, but did he ban it so someone actually understood his words?

I don't blame him after the Rooskies planted Hunter's laptop.

quote:

As a long-term happy Kaspersky user this also is a PITA

I too have been using Kaspersky for several years. I just purchased a 3 year renewal for 10 computers. Kaspersky found a Russian virus embeded in personal photos my niece sent me. The virus was not detected by Windows & Norton's.

I had been a long time Kaspersky user, I went with BitDefender several years ago, no issues.

What are they not telling us? I am of the school that light is the most effective antagonist for almost any infection. So failure to provide details is as detrimental as the original abuse.