Free Antivirus With Low Cpu Usage - freesbluesky63’s blog

As summer 2011 comes around the security vendors cast their eyes to the following year and start releasing the paid for versions of their antivirus programs. For most.

I received a question from jnc, who wrote: When you go to the WINDOWS TASK MANAGER, it has at the bottom of the window, CPU USAGE and a sign.

Memory Usage Test to See Which is the Lightest Antivirus Software • Raymond.CC

This software is scanned by SequoiaVote. 100 safe download is free of viruses and malware.

Hi friend, To reduce the CPU usage on Windows 8 do some of the following things: 1. Uninstall the unnecessary programs from programs list. 2. Remove unnecessary icons.

Some apparent antivirus programs are actually malware masquerading as legitimate software, such as WinFixer, MS Antivirus, and Mac Defender. 91.

Jhonwds wrote: Hello guys, Its been like 1 week that my PC is acting unusually. I have a HP Probook 4520s 2.53 ghz 5 months old. There are times my PC hits high CPU.

Android s increasing popularity has led to increased security threats, ranging from common malware to advanced Phishing and ID theft techniques. In order to help.

One of the most common things users do to try and keep their computer running as smooth as possible, is keep control over which programs start with Windows. Having just a few memory or processor hungry programs loading into the system tray on boot can have an adverse affect on the performance of your computer. One of the most common applications that will load with Windows and stay resident in the background while the system is on, will be your chosen antivirus software. Have you ever wondered which are the lightest antivirus packages available and which ones don t do so well on memory usage.

It s maybe not such a major issue for newer computers these days having an antivirus which isn t especially memory efficient because they often come equipped with 4GB or more of RAM. But if your computer isn t the latest and greatest, using a package which might possibly be eating hundreds of Megabytes of system memory could slow your computer down considerably at inopportune moments. To find out just how much memory gets used by running antivirus software, we ve decided to gather together a mixture of 25 popular commercial and free antivirus packages to see how they perform.

How We Tested

As you might expect, testing an antivirus product for its memory usage is certainly not an exact science because the program is never standing still and nearly always doing something in the background. A problem with taking memory readings is there are several different numbers you can look at. The two memory readings we paid most attention to were Working Set and Private Working Set WS Private, which do two things:

Working Set – This is the amount of memory used by the process PLUS the amount of memory that is shared with other processes. As such, this value isn t truly accurate because shared memory can be double counted due to the same resource being registered in multiple processes. It does though represent the maximum amount of non virtual memory in use by the process. This is the default memory column in the Windows XP Task Manager.

Private Working Set – Is similar to Working Set, but excludes the shared memory. This is only the the amount of memory in use by the process itself and isn t shared among other processes. Private Working Set is perhaps a more accurate indication of how much physical memory the process itself is using, and is also the default memory column for Task Manager in Windows Vista/7/8.

We decided to approach this task by gathering memory readings over a period of time. 10 readings were taken for each product at 30 second intervals, totaling 5 minutes of monitoring during idle and another 5 minutes while running a scan. The average score was then taken for each antivirus with all processes created by the application added together. All antivirus software was fully updated before testing using windows 7 32-bit, and the memory readings were taken using Sysinternals Process Explorer.

Below are the results for each antivirus package along with the average Working Set and Private Working Set scores in Kilobytes KB while idle and during a scan. The software is in reverse order with the heaviest Private Working Set usage for idle and scan combined listed first, going down to the lowest score and most efficient. If you want to jump straight to the list of results to see how your antivirus got on, they are at the bottom of page 2.

25. ZoneAlarm Free AntiVirus Firewall 11.0.000.504

Number of Processes: 4

Processes Monitored: ISWSVC.exe, vsmon.exe, zatray.exe, ForceField.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 223,260

Idle Private Working Set KB : 191,472

Scan Working Set KB : 287,443

Scan Private Working Set KB : 226,222

24. Sophos Endpoint Security and Control 10.2

Number of Processes: 7

Processes Monitored: swi_service.exe, SavService.exe, SAVAdminService.exe, ALsvc.exe, ALMon.exe, SavProgress.exe, SavMain.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 216,482

Idle Private Working Set KB : 192,436

Scan Working Set KB : 467,817

Scan Private Working Set KB : 198,452

23. Emsisoft Anti-Malware 7.0.0.21

Number of Processes: 3

Processes Monitored: a2guard.exe, a2service.exe, a2start.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 131,158

Idle Private Working Set KB : 125,337

Scan Working Set KB : 251,945

Scan Private Working Set KB : 240,770

22. Quick Heal AntiVirus Pro 2013

Number of Processes: 8

Processes Monitored: ScSecSvc.exe, SCANWSCS.EXE, scanner.exe, SAPISSVC.EXE, QUHLPSVC.EXE, OPSSVC.EXE, ONLINENT.EXE, EMLPROXY.EXE

Idle Working Set KB : 99,090

Idle Private Working Set KB : 66,134

Scan Working Set KB : 273,984

Scan Private Working Set KB : 227,424

21. McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2013

Number of Processes: 9

Processes Monitored: McAPExe.exe, mcinfo.exe, mcods.exe, McSACore.exe, mcshield.exe, McSvHost.exe, mcsvrcnt.exe, McUICnt.exe, mfefire.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 142,375

Idle Private Working Set KB : 103,518

Scan Working Set KB : 239,500

Scan Private Working Set KB : 184,214

20. Ad-Aware Free Antivirus 10.5.2.4379

Processes Monitored: SBAMSvc.exe, adawarebp.exe, AdAware.exe, AdAwareService.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 162,540

Idle Private Working Set KB : 118,728

Scan Working Set KB : 189,223

Scan Private Working Set KB : 144,394

19. Bitdefender Antivirus Free Edition 1.0.14.889

Number of Processes: 2

Processes Monitored: gziface.exe, gzserv.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 115,559

Idle Private Working Set KB : 91,742

Scan Working Set KB : 135,836

Scan Private Working Set KB : 115,795

18. Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus 6.0.1215

Number of Processes: 6

Processes Monitored: uiWatchDog.exe, uiSeAgnt.exe, coreServiceShell.exe, coreFrameworkHost.exe, AMSP_LogServer.exe, WSCStatusController.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 102,208

Idle Private Working Set KB : 72,754

Scan Working Set KB : 161,926

Scan Private Working Set KB : 130,022

17. Avira Free Antivirus 13.0.0.3499

Processes Monitored: avgnt.exe, avguard.exe, avshadow.exe, avwebgrd.exe, sched.exe, avscan.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 63,754

Idle Private Working Set KB : 41,138

Scan Working Set KB : 199,264

Scan Private Working Set KB : 157,750

16. VIPRE Antivirus 2013 6.2.1.10

Processes Monitored: SBAMSvc.exe, SBAMTray.exe, SBPIMSvc.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 114,098

Idle Private Working Set KB : 91,981

Scan Working Set KB : 134,488

Scan Private Working Set KB : 104,936

15. NANO Antivirus Free 0.24.0.52214

Processes Monitored: nanosvc.exe, nanoav.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 176,141

Idle Private Working Set KB : 53,846

Scan Working Set KB : 287,284

Scan Private Working Set KB : 131,201

14. ESET NOD32 Antivirus 6.0.316.0

Processes Monitored: egui.exe, ekrn.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 93,616

Idle Private Working Set KB : 76,441

Scan Working Set KB : 103,244

Scan Private Working Set KB : 82,913

13. Dr.Web Anti-virus 8.0.8.04230

Processes Monitored: dwarkdaemon.exe, dwengine.exe, dwnetfilter.exe, dwscanner.exe, dwservice.exe, spideragent.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 92,006

Idle Private Working Set KB : 66,822

Scan Working Set KB : 117,973

Scan Private Working Set KB : 90,430

12. Kaspersky Anti-Virus 13.0.1.4190

Processes Monitored: avp.exe, avp.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 65,625

Idle Private Working Set KB : 52,218

Scan Working Set KB : 103,377

Scan Private Working Set KB : 92,105

11. Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2013 16.28.0.1789

Number of Processes: 5

Processes Monitored: bdagent.exe, downloader.exe, updatesrv.exe, vsserv.exe, odscanui.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 81,360

Idle Private Working Set KB : 47,658

Scan Working Set KB : 150,478

Scan Private Working Set KB : 62,877

10. Microsoft Security Essentials 4.2.223.0

Processes Monitored: MsMpEng.exe, msseces.exe, NisSrv.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 70,484

Idle Private Working Set KB : 51,750

Scan Working Set KB : 79,103

Scan Private Working Set KB : 57,787

9. F-Secure Anti-Virus 12.77 build 100

Processes Monitored: fsgk32.exe, fshoster32.exe, FSM32.exe, FSMA32.exe, fsorsp.exe, fssm32.exe, fsblsrv.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 62,042

Idle Private Working Set KB : 40,246

Scan Working Set KB : 92,386

Scan Private Working Set KB : 66,819

8. AVG AntiVirus Free 2013.0.3272

Processes Monitored: avgcsrvx.exe, avgemcx.exe, avgidsagent.exe, avgnsx.exe, avgrsx.exe, avgui.exe, avgwdsvc.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 194,888

Idle Private Working Set KB : 34,398

Scan Working Set KB : 199,628

Scan Private Working Set KB : 63,403

7. UnThreat AntiVirus Free 2013 6.2.37.17222

Processes Monitored: utsvc.exe, UnThreat.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 13,615

Idle Private Working Set KB : 8,953

Scan Working Set KB : 87,027

Scan Private Working Set KB : 73,778

6. Immunet 3.0.8.9025 Free

Processes Monitored: agent.exe, iptray.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 40,413

Idle Private Working Set KB : 29,304

Scan Working Set KB : 63,475

Scan Private Working Set KB : 45,510

5. Norton AntiVirus 20.3.1.22

Processes Monitored: ccsvchst.exe, ccsvchst.exe, ccsvchst.exe, ccsvchst.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 59,304

Idle Private Working Set KB : 19,362

Scan Working Set KB : 111,094

Scan Private Working Set KB : 52,576

4. Panda Cloud Antivirus Free 2.1.1

Processes Monitored: PSUNMain.exe, PSUAService.exe, PSUAMain.exe, PSANHost.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 31,714

Idle Private Working Set KB : 20,340

Scan Working Set KB : 76,498

Scan Private Working Set KB : 41,172

3. Comodo Antivirus Free 6.1.275152.2801

Processes Monitored: cavwp.exe, cis.exe, CisTray.exe, cmdagent.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 39,664

Idle Private Working Set KB : 14,954

Scan Working Set KB : 105,317

Scan Private Working Set KB : 34,453

2. Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus 2013 8.0.2.127

Processes Monitored: WRSA.exe, WRSA.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 3,823

Idle Private Working Set KB : 2,726

Scan Working Set KB : 9,949

Scan Private Working Set KB : 7,673

1. Avast. Free Antivirus 8.0.1483

Processes Monitored: AvastSvc.exe, AvastUI.exe

Idle Working Set KB : 9,706

Idle Private Working Set KB : 4,290

Scan Working Set KB : Resets every 10 seconds

Scan Private Working Set KB : Resets every 10 seconds

Results and Summary

The result tables are simply split into two, one for the idle memory usage and one for the usage during a virus scan, both in alphabetical order. The colors are self explanatory with green the lightest antivirus and yellow second best. At the other end, red is the heaviest and orange the next most memory hungry.

Average Memory Scores While Idle

Average Memory Scores During a Scan

Summary

It was quite a surprise to see a couple of antivirus packages actually using an average of nearly 200MB while sitting idle. ZoneAlarm was also very high in both scores during scanning while the Sophos Working Set score more than doubled. Do note that ZoneAlarm does include a firewall though, and doesn t have a version without it.

On the positive side, Webroot SecureAnywhere proves that cloud antivirus packages can be extremely efficient in memory usage, and it was very good in both idle and scanning scores. You ll also note that both Working Set and WS Private were very close together so it s also not consuming shared resources from other programs.

Avast is the most popular free antivirus around today, and its memory usage is quite impressive. During scanning Avast kept flushing its memory every 10 seconds which kept usage at a very low level, and it should never grow above a small number of Megabytes. Idle resource usage was also very impressive. For efficient memory usage, Avast is the no.1 free antivirus by far.

Some small surprises were Comodo, Bitdefender Free and Avira for different reasons. While Comodo seems to have improved its memory efficiency in recent times, Avira appears to have gone in the opposite direction. What used to be possibly the lightest antivirus package you could get for free, is now quite heavy on memory usage, especially during a scan. Although Bitdefender s memory did fluctuate a lot, on average it still consumes a lot of memory for a program with virtually no features or options.

Final Note: While these results obviously test the antivirus memory usage, they don t take into account the features present in each application and its detection rates. Therefore you shouldn t automatically assume lighter is better because a more memory efficient program might not have the amount of features of an antivirus using a few more Megabytes. If your current package is hungry for memory, this does give you a good idea of what the lightest antivirus packages are that you might like to look at a bit closer.

08-22-2013, PM

Golden Member

Join Date: Oct 2012

Posts: 1,963

Antivirus with lowest CPU usage

I m finding that quite a lot of people I know are still using machines with processors over 10 years old, P4 s, semperons, One even has a Duron. The problem they are having is that they no longer have enough CPU power to cope with even Microsoft Security Essentials Real time scanning, it slows down everything they do.

If they could afford to buy new machines they probably would but when all they want is browsing and occasional image editing, things the PC s can handle quite well without the Antivirus or with much older Antivirus programs, I d rather find a solution that suited them without them having to shell out.

Does anybody know which current antivirus programs use the least resources whilst giving decent protection.

__________________

i7 6700K 4.6GHz - Asus Z170 Deluxe - Noctua NH-D15 - Asus GTX780 DirectCU II OC 3GB 1215 7000 - 16GB Gskill RipjawsV DDR4 3200 - Corsair HX850i - Nanoxia Deep Silence One - Samsung 950 Pro NVMe - Samsung 830 128GB - Spinpoint F3 1TB - WD RE4 2TB - WD Caviar Blue 640 - Dell U2913WM Ultrawide - Logitech G19 - Corsair M65 - Sony STR-DN1050 Receiver - Q Acoustics 2000i 5.1 speakers.

08-22-2013, PM

Join Date: May 2013

Location: UK

Posts: 1,920

Avast is good at using relatively small amounts of resources.

I say while using an ancient computer, and Avast at the same time..

Also, the free version seems to do everything I want, with no real drawbacks except an annual renewal requirement, but you get that with annually paid for ones anyway.

Last edited by SOFTengCOMPelec; 08-22-2013 at PM.

Reason: Price

Will give that a try, although I do seem to remember changing from avast to MSE on one machine to free up resources. What CPU are you using.

08-23-2013, AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deders

What CPU are you using.

Good question.

AMD Phenom 9600 Quad win7 reports 1.8 GHz, underclocked due to fault, 4 Gb Ram, Win7 It s still fast/good enough for a mainly web browsing computer.

In my experience, Virus checkers can be problematic i.e. cause resource problems, such as noticeable slowdowns when you are using single core processors and/or don t have much ram because it is a really old computer.

Therefore, although my processor is relatively slow by modern standards, its multi core quad and reasonable ram 4 Gb, running Windows7, may help lighten the load of the virus checker.

When I use to use a VERY old computer it was single core AMD, approx 1 Ghz, Athlon., with only about 512 Mb ram, winXP, it was much more badly hit by virus checkers. Probably grinding to a halt, but Avast seemed to give the old beast the best chance of usability, until the computer eventually totally packed up probably due to mass capacitor failure or something, way too old to consider repairing.

Relatively speaking relative to the speed, number of cores and ram size of the computer, Avast was the best one fastest, when I last investigated virus checkers, quite some time ago.

I still use Avast free on windows computers, and it still seems to run very efficiently and quickly.

Last edited by SOFTengCOMPelec; 08-23-2013 at AM.

08-23-2013, PM

Join Date: Feb 2008

Posts: 1,761

For years now Ive used Centurion s Drive Shield / Smart Restart

Effectively doesnt use any CPU.

It is what all the public libraries here use on the computers which the public is allowed to use on the networks.

Both good to know, thanks. I d give you rep if I could.

08-25-2013, AM

Lifer

Join Date: Nov 2012

Location: Blips and Chips

Posts: 13,689

I use Avira and I don t think it uses a lot of CPU cycles. Another thing you could try is Panda cloud.

Diamond Member

Join Date: May 2011

Posts: 6,187

1 Avast but remove all the shields except the file shield. Same goes for sandboxing, browser plugins, etc.

Btw, MSE s real time scanning or scheduled scans. I always switch off the latter.

Last edited by mikeymikec; 08-25-2013 at AM.

Originally Posted by mikeymikec

It s generally either the realtime antimalware process or the realtime antivirus that wants to scan everything as you click on it.

Will definitely give Avast another go

08-25-2013, PM

Join Date: Feb 2004

Posts: 4,113

My total avast memory usage is about 8 MB.

08-26-2013, PM

avast has made a significant improvement on a Semperon x64 1600, now to try the Duron. Thanks people.

08-31-2013, AM

Senior Member

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 229

Avast is good, F-Secure is light as can be Running it now, Kaspersky/Bitdefender are hit or miss

take a look at this:

5 sort 1

then compare against their real world performance chart and find a happy medium. Personally, I m loving F-Secure s suite.

Junior Member

Join Date: Aug 2013

Posts: 2

Hey. I am using HDFC s iOS banking app for doing my banking transactions. does anyone know the best antivirus for my iPhone that could protect my bank account with any unwanted threat.

Look here and tell me Avast is still great.

09-02-2013, AM

By far Bitdefender is the best. I have a free version on a computer.

09-04-2013, PM

Location: Regina, SK

Posts: 4

See the column PERFORMANCE here. If you need the lowest CPU/memory usage - Webroot is a winner, however Bitdefender is the best aggregate choice.

P.S. I also use avast., cause it s free

Avast was a winner on the Duron, I think MSE includes Bitdefender as it was listed as one of the 2 processes that was causing everything to take 3 times to load.

09-19-2013, AM

Join Date: Jul 2005

Location: Israeli side

Posts: 23,405

Avast was a winner on the Duron, I think MSE includes Bitdefender as it was listed as one of the 2 processes that was causing everything to take 3 times to load.

I switched to Bitdefender after my McAfee expired and I never looked back. Everything loads as fast as it did the day I bought the machine..

You use the words I thinkwhich translated means -- I really have no clue but I wish to bash bitDefender so here goes.

JohnOfSheffield -- That said, Palestine will exist when they understand that Israel exists, it s that blatantly simple.

Originally Posted by JEDIYoda

You have to bear in mind that the computer in question is over 10 years old, and that I m thorough enough to look up the processes that were hogging the CPU. One referred to MSE, the other to Bitdefender. After uninstalling MSE and installing Avast we no longer had to wait 5 mins for a program to load. Bitdefender was never installed on the machine by itself.

I m sure it works fine on newer processors which are far better optimised and have more modern instruction sets.

Odd. Try the presumably in existence and available to download from the bitdefender site Bitdefender removal tool. Alternatively it could be something scammy posing as a bitdefender executable, try malwarebytes on a full scan.

Somehow I doubt it, I installed everything on there myself and up until that point he only used a dial up connection for that computer. He has a laptop for his general use.

Also there was no sign of either process after MSE was uninstalled.

MSE does not install BitDefender by any stretch of the definition.

Platinum Member

Join Date: Nov 1999

Posts: 2,085

Why use any of this useless crap at all.

Have tons of machines and never had an issue for 10 years.

Noobs get these fakealerts, and all the people open attachments from ANYONE LOLOLOLOL.

They are also running admin accounts with wide open policies, dumb, dumb dumb.

And they never update java/flash/acrobat etc.

Just using noscript on FF eliminates 99 of the problem right there.

Stop opening attachments from IRS, UPS, etc. Really, you re going to open a zip file from ejrmc 14443.com.

09-19-2013, PM

Minerva, if all/most issues are caused by stupid behaviour, why do you have NoScript on your machine, and why does it eliminate 99 of the problem. NoScript also requires quite a bit more education than a heck of a lot of people would be willing to invest in.

I personally haven t had any malware issues in at least ten years, but I still run AV because I would look bloody silly if I inadvertently infected a load of customers computers with malware because of poor security on my own computer.

Malware is sometimes delivered through advertising on legitimate sites, targeting vulnerabilities in up-to-date software.

I ve known quite a few customers who were silly enough to open attachments or click on phishy links in e-mails, but the situation also isn t helped by the fact that Java is installed on pretty much every PC when it leaves the factory for no good reason, or an old version of Adobe Reader, or they leave the factory without half the available Windows updates.

I think anyone would have to be pretty foolish not to run AV or indeed any easy-to-use line of defence which doesn t inconvenience the user significantly.

Join Date: Sep 2013

Posts: 11

I don t know how much performance loss is a concern for y all, but on otherwise decent proprietary machines with integrated, uber low-mem GPUs from eras past, even Avast causes enough desktop lag on a fresh install of Win 7 to not be worth its moderate safety boost, IMO. CPU usage doesn t seem to be as much of a problem, when your literal 8mb of unnecessarily ancient VRAM and no non-PCI video adapter slots makes the display/animated elements of most applications slow you down considerably. I m not qulaified to identify the threshold at which this becomes a real issue, but some light experimentation has made it seem quite likely that this is the primary issue on my computer, and it came with 1024MB of ddr2 ram i think. stupid dxdiag arbitrarily making me download external diagnostic software to do what it has no reason to not do and a default 2.80 GHz pentium 4, so it s not exactly a ridiculously awful computer for an utterly broke user like me.

EDIT: Minerva, is it just me, or does NoScript still have a tiny bit of an unnecessarily inconvenient design, for constant use especially on a machine as incorrigibly inclined to periodically freeze as mine. For any plugins you re not using all the time, I assume AdBlock QuickJava or something similar should be just as good with JavaScript and such toggled off, if you re, say, reading an article on a page containing purely aesthetic visuals, or something comparable.

Last edited by Lucas Prassas; 09-22-2013 at PM.

Join Date: Nov 2005

Posts: 13,896

No, the machine was idle for 2 hrs with NOTHING running or opened.

Rig1: Xeon X5690, Asrock X58, Geforce 210 0db, 120Hz 27 2ms Asus, Cherry MX Blacks, Samsung 128Gb 840 Pro, Vertex2 100Gb, 8x1TB Samsung F3 on a Lian Li HDD Power Controller.

Rig2: Xeon W3690 4.2GHz 1.32v idle 1.33v load, HK 3.0, Swiftech MCR320 Drive Rev3, EVGA 760 Classified, GTX 670, 144Hz 24 1ms Asus, Cherry MX Reds, Samsung 840 Evo 120Gb, Vertex LE 100Gb, Creative Zx

Member

Join Date: Jan 2006

Posts: 146

If you look at that, they re really saying they re not focusing on tests, but on real threats. Their claim is sort of like that they re not optimizing drivers for a particular benchmark.

I know when it first came out it was at the very top for detection. I hope it hasn t somehow gotten worse since then.

At any rate, I like it, and it s free, so I use ithope it s doing it s job.

Posts: 1,915

All of the big copiers contain hard drives at the very least for the software, many of them scan the documents to the hard drive and cache them there.

Each one behaves differently but there is a huge risk for data leaks, the best bet is to scrub the hard drive before selling on the copier, it will require having the printer software reinstalled so you might have to consult with a repair engineer first before doing anything so you know the proceedure for restoring the factory default software to the disk.

My Security/hacking blog and DrunkenGamers YouTube

Intel 2600k 4.9Ghz ThermalRight TRUE Spirit 140 16Gb PC3-12800

MSI GTX 980 Gaming OCZ Vertex 3 SSD 16Tb Western Digital Greens

BenQ BL3201PT 32 4k Dell 3007WFP-HC 30 2560x1600

BenQ XL2420T 24 1080p 120hz Oculus Rift DK2

Join Date: May 2000

Posts: 890

You should be able to find one for 100-150, I think the wild card certs at alphaSSL partner with dynadot is 149.

Gamer/Workstation: FX 8150 4.55Ghz, Crosshair V 990FX, H100, 7970, 120GB SSD, 16 gig DDR3 1600, Haf 932

Linux Workstation: Phenom II 1055T, MSI 790FX, Nvidia GTX 460, PC Power Cooling 610W, 16 gig DDR3 1600, Antec Titan 550

Join Date: May 2003

Posts: 2,381

While not related directly to this breach, this underscores one of the biggest user-hostile downsides to Adobe s and others cloudy-SAS model. All of the users become one big target instead of millions of discrete ones.

Your heart is in the right place. But still, you are a very disturbed individual.

-Xionide

Join Date: Aug 2011

Posts: 672

Fair enough, but not that new.

In an old corporate penetration testing exercise about 5 years ago, I loaded a copy of the bible into John the Ripper to crack the password of a religious group.

A common password was something like Jeremiah . I wouldn t have guessed that without this.

But, good for him loading some full sentences, I guess. .

I thought typical porn is generally not that bad, as long as you avoid mass redirect collections that eventually loop back to nothing at all, or just lead to copies of real videos. Also, GIFs often excerpts are usually better anyway, given the lack of insultingly stupid/sometimes pointlessly offensive 5-minute intros, obnoxiously horrible acting and sound, and equally unprofessional, dude-blocked camera angles for certain prolonged, secondary scenes. Of course, getting some viruses, on occasion, is probably not easily averted by any extensive internet user that isn t running Linux or a virtual machine/something similarly advanced. Geez I wish I could at least get a working means of OS installation for the 8.00 I currently have until next month, though I don t think I ll be spending the money anyway.