It is safe to run multiple Anti Virus

If you have two antivirus programs on your computer-one that provides the best protection and the other (i.e. Vipre) that provides the best removal of infected problems, wouldn't that provide the best solution? Install Vipre, but not as the active antivirus, since it sucks at initially providing protection from infection, since it is the best antivirus available to remove infections once they are in one's PC. Use one for protection and then use Vipre to remove those ifections that get past the mail antivirus program. I don't know if this is correct-I am far from a computer expert-that is just what seems reasonable and rational to me-and I know that computer software doesn't always play by those rules. I would like to know if my assumptions are correct.

in these forums is that only one anti-virus is required as long as it is kept up to date and it is allowed to update its virus definitions automatically.

Two could be used if one of them was just used as a manual scanner; that is, not set to scan in the background. But really all the major players in the AV world pretty much do the same job, so personally I see little to gain from that.

However, anti-spyware is different. Even if your AV has an anti-spyware element I would still recommend another two anti-spyware scanners for once-a-week manual scans, like MalwareBytes Anti-malware and SUPERAntispyware, both of which have free versions.

Mark

PS I guess you did notice how old this discussion is? It was just by chance I saw your post.

Hi all

- Windows 7 64-bit
- Norton 360
- MBAM Pro

I'm running Norton 360 & MBAM Pro together and haven't had an issue as yet, ie, no intrusion getting past the 2 protection programs

I've thought about disabling my MBAM real-time scanning and run an on-demand nighty, weekly, scan but I'm curious to see if I'll encounter conflict issues so I decided to stay with the MBAM pro enabled for now.

I run both products in a full system scan mode unattended overnight.

After reading various PC forums around the 'net, it's generally recommended to run a 2nd-opinion product and MBAM was highly recommended.

I installed MBAM in Dec '12, about the same time that I installed Norton. I'm a 1st-time user with Norton. Prior to that, I'd run Trend Micro and then ESET, both of which weren't able to completely block all intrusions, or rather, the effects of those intrusions.

These 2 AV's would typically detect the parent intrusion and notify me in the System Tray, but weren't able to block all of the "tentacles" of the hits.

I switched to Norton in Dec '12 after running ESET for about 3 years. My experience with ESET wasn't completely successful, with ESET missing some intrusions.

I'm a careful 'net guy but I've averaged about 1 intrusion per year since ~2004 or so. In some cases, "safe mode" scans and "Restore Points" have been successful in cleaning the HDD but I always have a cloned HDD on the shelf for a plug-and-play recovery in case of a pesky intrusion or OS issue.

Since switching to Norton, there have been no intrusions as yet.

I've noticed one commonality when it comes to AV threads & discussions. There's a wide range of user experiences.

For example, I have a friend that's run Norton for years with no issues. I have another friend that's running MacAfee with the same results.

Before I tried ESET, it had been recommended to me by some knowledgeable IT guys, due to ESET's main claim to fame being an efficient PC resource user. That's a good selling point for the product but as mentioned earlier, everyone's experience will differ.

I hear what everyone is saying. But they have no proof. Just their word or 5 year old examples or just the programs refuse to get along.

I only run Avast. I have active scan Disabled on MSE normally.

You can prove this to yourself. Mix up your selected antivirus and report back what happens. But there's a problem in that such mixtures tend to work or not then later if they work cause issues.

You can take the moderators here that it is so but what proof do you need? Here I have my proof after some thousand incidents. But would that be proof to the non-believer? No it would not.

I think for those that want proof it is best we let them learn on their own.
Bob

Way to win the argument by not arguing. Other than the stigma that developed which keeps me from running MSE and Avast active scan together constantly.
What and why do multiple anti viruses not work. This seems a common question. You would think you smart guys would have a solid way to answer other than because I said so by now.

You have access to these and other forums to make a case EITHER WAY that having more than one active product creates or does not create a problem.

Folk want trouble free machines and your advice so far is such that creates more troubles.

As such the moderators will comment.
Bob

I guess I still have a more basic question, why would anyone want to run more than one at a time, I mean if you just get a good package in the first place there is no need to run a second active AV program.

As one of the mods pointed out, having scanners you can run manually for a second opinion is not a bad idea, just not two or more active at once is not. Not sure what kind of proof you are looking for, but I have not only cleaned up ungodly messes of multiple AV and other junk running on many systems only to have the own think I put in a caster CPU...

I have personally seen issues with multi-AV programs, some folks thinking if one is good two must be better then their performance goes to lunch and I get in and find the two AV fighting with each other.

If you are happy with your config, great, however you posted it to the forum as a question and now folks are answering it.

See that is more the answer I was looking for. I can clearly see your the more experience tech guy.

While my specific configuration might work. I'll gladly concede that it isn't for most users and increases the chances of issues.

A great program to have. For regular home use, it is in the top 3 of all time. I would however like to see mor ethings on MSE like an automatic update schedle, but all in all, you should go with MSE when using just for home pc's.

I totally agree that only 1 Anti-virus/spyware program ahould be running at one time. I would also however not have extra scanners on my system. I would use online scanners for "second opinons" than offline scanners as then your computer will have more resources available to use on other things.

Almost all anti-virus programs won't work together if they are both active at the same time. Having multiple scanners scanning will crash your system because it is an overload of input. The system cannot process two anti-viruses at once or store both programs in memory at once which is why there is great potential for the system to crash and/or BSOD.

I tested this theory by planting a virus on the system tht both MSE and Avast had signatures for. when i ran them both. The programs not only didn't pickup the virus, but also corrupted each other.

As I said, if you use only MSE, you will have more-than excellent scanning and real-time protection. Maybe use malwarebytes too as it is a malware program, not virus/spyware.

So Their active sheilds didn't catch the virus. Or running their scanners at the same time didn't catch it?

Also. What kind of PC are you running. MSE takes less than 50m of ram and Avast less than 10. Modern PCs won't notice till it takes way more than that. stuff more than 3 years old might.

Although I turned off MSE. I still have MsMpEng.exe running. That alone actually. about 50mb

I don't run MSE but I do run MS Defender and that is where my MsMpEng.exe is sourced to.

One question I have had from the start of this is, why is it you want to run more than one anti-virus package?

Because I can. Basically. If you can. Why not. most any anti viras takes less than 2% of my CPU/Ram. The only time you need it all on modern PCs is Gaming. Which is when you turn it all off. So with all the cyber danger. Why not have 2 if you can without issues.

I might switch to Avira soon. It seems to be better than anything else period. Check other tread for links.

While we be trolling together. What are your opinions on WinPatrol. I haven't had it running in a while but I want your opinions.

Thanks for they why you want more than one, because you can was not what I was expecting, but OK, guess that explains exploring if it is an issue or not.

As for WinPatrol, I used to run it all the time and think it is up there with Malwarebytes in quality and effectiveness. I just had very little activity from it so stopped, I may go back.

That would be a worthy augmentation to your AV software in my opinion.

I would just like to mention that if MSE is installed, it will automatically disable Windows Defender to avoid conflicts. I guess MS knew that there would be an issue if both are running even though Windows Defender is just an antispyware program, not an antivirus.

Actually, MSE does update its definitions automatically and this doesn't even have to be scheduled. Updating is done as soon as new definitions become available. This is done through Windows Update if it is enabled. I have Windows 7 though, if that matters.

I also have the full version of MBAM and it doesn't conflict with MSE.