Re: What about Kaspersky AV?

["security () dsnmail net" <security () dsnmail net>]

This doesn't suprise me at all. The main problem with Norton and
Mcafee is that neither one detects/cleans as well as Kaspersky or some
of the other better AV's, yet the user has a false sense of security.



On 3/20/08, Karla Lucas <klucas () sheridan hpmin com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> I agree. Ours is a small network (52 machines) but when I took the job
> all but two of the machines were running Symantec, and not a single one
> of them was clean. They averaged 4 active infections per box, some much
> higher. The other two were running McAfee, and one of them wouldn't boot
> properly until I removed it.
>
> The first thing I did was switch to Kaspersky. In three years malware
> has tried to infect the network only 3 times that I am aware of, and
> Kaspersky caught them all.
>
> - --
> Karla Lucas
> ITM/HIPAA SO, Sheridan County Health Complex
> 826 18th St., Box 167
> Hoxie, KS  67740
> PH: (785) 675-3281 Ext. 165
> E-Mail: klucas () sheridan hpmin com
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFH4mblkixC07R6u1ARAlyQAJ9SzunjMDhWNV/Jhl6ioiG0TIrSwACcDgQI
> 9mXzQPf8a4pYg2du0zySc0U=
> =jPjL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----