LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for IT-DISCUSS Archives


IT-DISCUSS Archives

IT-DISCUSS Archives


IT-DISCUSS@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

IT-DISCUSS Home

IT-DISCUSS Home

IT-DISCUSS  November 2009

IT-DISCUSS November 2009

Subject:

Re: ESET License?

From:

Rudy Raab <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Technology Discussion at UVM <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:49:33 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (186 lines)

I'm kind of scared to jump in here with the IT big leagues, but I feel like
putting my two cents in. 

I've used AVG temporarily a couple of years back. I didn't like it very
much. And since then, everything I've read recently says that it's gotten
slow and bloated like Norton used to be. 

I would recommend Security Essentials right now. An article in the
Washington Post
(http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/09/stress_testing_microso
fts_free.html) cites a review by AV-Test.org in which MSE detected 98.4% of
the virus/spyware samples it was subjected to. That's right on par with
Norton (and superior to both AVG and NOD32), which is impressive. And what's
more, MSE is supposed to be *very* light on system resources, and a
"set-and-forget" AV that doesn't bother the user unless something's wrong. 

As for spyware, my personal belief is that a dedicated program is best.
Windows Defender is decent in this regard, but I highly recommend Ad-Aware
Free. When I installed the new 2010 version and scanned my laptop, it found
spyware that both Windows Defender and Norton 2009 had missed. 

Just my personal opinions on the matter. 

--Rudy Raab
UVM Student

-----Original Message-----
From: Technology Discussion at UVM [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Bryan Fleming
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 4:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ESET License?

 >Good or bad experience with AVG Free?
I've used it with a number of family members and clients for some 
years...  I haven't been very impressed with it, but figured it was 
better than nothing.

 There are those times where I wonder if telling someone that they are 
unprotected and will need to be careful would be better than giving them 
AVG or other options and them considering themselves invulnerable.  Part 
of the problem is really more of the spyware/malware rather than 
viruses.  Their paid for products may be better, and I suspect that the 
free is good against viruses, but viruses are not the kind of malware 
that's normally giving me headaches.  But then I've had clients with 
spyware infections that have been running nod32 so there's nothing 
perfect even with paid products.

I've started using Security Essentials with some people, the jury is 
still out, but I haven't had one back with infections in the past month 
or so since I started with it.  Too small a sample size though.

Certainly would love to get other's opinions on them...

-Bryan

Dean Williams wrote:
> It was financially feasible, because of vendor license terms, to 
> license Symantec Antivirus for home computers, but that's not the case 
> with NOD32; there are a fixed number of licenses.  We have not made 
> that sufficiently clear.  
>
> Software made available on the software download site is generally 
> licensed for use on University-owned computers.  Student-owned 
> computers are included when it's software students need for academic 
> purposes, or, as in the NOD32 case, for the protection of the 
> networked community, and when it's financially affordable.   (UVM's 
> NERCOMP membership has helped us purchase NOD32 for students at a 
> lower per-computer cost than for University-owned computers.)  When 
> vendor licensing terms make it financially and logistically feasible, 
> software can be licensed so that no one has to contribute a 
> per-computer amount towards the license costs; in other cases, UVM is 
> able to negotiate a volume license but people using the software 
> contribute to the license cost.    Some software is licensed per seat, 
> and some per FTE or headcount -- available terms vary, and what how 
> broadly software can be made available is most often a function of 
> cost (Microsoft Campus Agreement is another example in which a true 
> "site" license is cost prohibitive).  
>
> The good news for faculty and staff personally owned computers is that 
> AVG has a decent virus protection product that's free (on personally 
> owned computers, not on institutionally owned computers).  It has a 
> good reputation, and provides an upgrade path to their non-free 
> advanced products.  
>
> Does anyone have other protection products to recommend for faculty 
> and staff personally owned computers?  Good or bad experience with AVG 
> Free?  
>
> I've been sidestepping the question about a computer purchased with a 
> mix of University and personal funds.  Who actually owns it?  
>
> The issue of using personally owned computers for any University 
> business is a hot topic, for sure, and there is a bit of a policy 
> vacuum in that area right now.  Development of that policy will have 
> to balance costs, practicality, and some inescapable requirements 
> related to security and legal compliance.  
>
> -Dean 
>
> On Nov 11, 2009, at 3:28 PM, Bryan Fleming wrote:
>
>> Good clarification, thanks Dean and Andrew.   Is that true also of 
>> other licensed software such as endnote, ArcGIS and others? I'm 
>> looking at the specific of a personal machine for work use, and not 
>> using endnote to catalog your DVDs. ;)  A gray area for sure though.
>>
>> So just a few thoughts worth considering..  
>>
>> 1)With the VPN we can't access local networks while connected, this 
>> is to protect campus resources from whatever nastiness is present on 
>> your local network.  (since many machines will route by default) But 
>> the computer that is connecting may have all sorts of nastiness on it 
>> which through the VPN can get access to the campus.  
>>
>> 2)I know some staff/faculty members that bring their personal laptop 
>> on campus to do work. (again with the result of nastiness getting 
>> access to campus)
>>
>> 3)For planning for and in the event of a pandemic people are/would be 
>> specifically asked to be doing work on their personal machines.
>>
>> There is of course then the concern of sensitive data being used on 
>> compromised systems.  An expensive and damaging potential problem.
>>
>> I'm not saying that antivirus is any sort of panacea, but it's one 
>> more part of the puzzle.  Granted with Microsoft's protection now 
>> being free this may be less of a point than previously, but many 
>> users aren't aware of it as a solution.
>> >From a security standpoint it looks to me like providing some sort 
>> of solution to staff & faculty might well be in UVM's best interest.  
>> And in fact may be far less expensive than privacy breach remediation 
>> and litigation.
>>
>> It seems like we should set some sort of policy with it published 
>> very very clearly (probably a link right on the the download for the 
>> VPN would be a good idea) for personal machines used for work (and 
>> there may be one, but the link on the vpn download still strikes me 
>> as a good idea), be it that it has to use protection we provide (if 
>> we were to update our license) or to use one of some suggested 
>> products ideally including at least one free solution.  Perhaps 
>> adding them at least as links to the software download site for 
>> personal machines.   Of course that may leave us needing to support 
>> those programs as well.
>>
>> This could be as simple (and inexpensive) as adding a link to the 
>> software download site to Microsoft security essentials for personal 
>> machines, linking a policy off the VPN download and planning to 
>> support security essentials.  But for liability and prevention 
>> reasons it would seem like a good thing to make as explicit as possible.
>>
>> -Bryan
>
> On Nov 11, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Helen Read wrote:
>
>> At 02:27 PM 11/11/2009, Dean Williams wrote:
>>> The software download site 
>>> <https://www.uvm.edu/software/magicscript.php?platform=Windows> now 
>>> carries this clarification of the NOD32 license:
>>>
>>>     Licensed for UVM students on personally-owned computers and for
>>>     faculty/staff on UVM-owned computers only.
>>>
>>
>> This is news to me. I thought all along that NOD32, and Norton 
>> Anti-virus before it, were licensed for home use for all UVM 
>> affiliates. Isn't the idea to make it as easy as possible for the UVM 
>> community to keep their computers virus-free, so as not to infect the 
>> campus network?
>>
>> If the license really does not include faculty/staff personally owned 
>> computers, I think we should upgrade the license so that it does.
>>
>> Many/most of us use personally owned computers to do UVM work from 
>> home, and there is also a gray area with, say, my laptop that was 
>> paid for partly by my department and partly by me. Is that UVM owned, 
>> or personally owned?
>>
>>
>> Helen Read
>> Senior Lecturer
>> Department of Mathematics & Statistics
>> University of Vermont
>>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003, Week 1
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
August 1997
July 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
May 1996
December 1995
November 1995
September 1995
August 1995
March 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager