I have no problem anymore since the update to the latest Google Chrome 68.0.3440.75. So I don't think Kaspersky fixed it, but Google did something to solve it.
https://usa.kaspersky.com/free-cloud-antivirus It looks like now there is also a free version of Kaspersky Security Cloud
security cloud was lighter than the other counterparts when i had a license and was using it. i would give this a try
It's not clear to me whether security cloud is a management sw only (so you need to install Kaspersky Free AV) or it integrates a cloud AV too
its a version where sigs are cloud only and no local sigs other than that its the same as other Kaspersky products the free one is basically KFA but no local sigs, so active internet connection is a must the paid one is like KTS
Ok. I disabled it because people said it breaks encryption with TLS 1.3 or that it did harm to it in any other way. I searched who said that, but I couldn't find it here, so I guess it was on Malwaretips. Can you please ask there, Gandalf? I am no longer using that "forum". I am referring to this: https://malwaretips.com/threads/how-kaspersky-makes-you-vulnerable.45290/ Please ask them about FREAK attack, if you want: https://malwaretips.com/threads/kaspersky-free-causing-err_ssl_version_interference.85177/ seems fitting. (If they know more than the people here.)
So, it seems very interesting if you try it and wanna share some screenshots, it would be great Does the free version have system watcher? Edit: yes https://help.kaspersky.com/KSCloud/Win2.0/en-US/152975.htm It looks like KSC is for KFA what Avira Security Suite is for Avira AV: the same AV with some extras (pc cleaner and such). And you still have to download signatures: https://help.kaspersky.com/KSCloud/Win2.0/en-US/93957.htm
indeed the same modules are available as in KFA http://any.ac/MAvCRz.png it is for USA people only tho, no GDPR options or excluding yourself from targeted marketing also there is an Android version but also only available to USA people only. that comparison isn't really accurate since KSC has the things that KTS has in addition, meanwhile Avira's launcher is just a bloat machine.
I never use https scanning in any AV if available.It is my viewpoint that if you can get a malware from a https connection then you probably shouldn't use windows in the first place.
https just means your connection to a website is encrypted, it does not mean it is secure and malware free.
I have yet to see a https website serving malware on https(https sites serving malware on http popup/ads don't count).I am sure there are sites that do serve malware over https but I am also sure that if one follow standard safe browsing practices then one would have to really unlucky to get infected this way(in which case getting infected would be the least of your worries anyway).
I'd be interested in hear from an expert, like maybe @cruelsister . Thanks for any input CS. I'm sure there is / has been examples proving that https does not mean malware free.
When you had to pay for them malware distributors didn't use certificates. Now that certificates are free, everybody use it - even bad guys. Now that Chrome labels http sites as insecure, we can expect more sites switching to https and by this most of malware to be delivered through https.
HTTPS(SSL) cert can be obtained for free without making a sweat. it's not the same as app signing cert / EV cert.
Here is one thread about Let's encrypt: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/lets-encrypt.373823/ and an example how it could be abused: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/thr...a-boon-for-cybercriminals-expert-says.395389/
Check phishtank, many phishing websites are on https https://www.phishtank.com/phish_search.php?valid=y&active=y&Search=Search
I am assuming a http connection even if originated from a https site will still be treated as any other http connection & will be scanned.
What I meant to say is that I never come across malware https sites,only http malware sites(that too 99% of the time those coin mining scripts) during my browsing sessions.I will have to go out of my way by quite a bit to come across a https malware site.
HTTPS sites never had anything to do with malware. It's only reason to exist is to stop someone from intercepting your plain text traffic and that only matters if it contains something useful to those intercepting it. Unfortunately all of these "This site is not secure!" warnings do is make people think the site has malware or that it is free of it if it is "Secure". As mentioned throughout this thread, anyone can get a free basic SSL certificate and make a "secure" website that serves malware, which is actually harder to identify than from a non-encrypted site. SSL prevents data theft only, it does nothing to reduce the chances of infection. You can only scan the traffic if your AV intercepts it with its own certificate, else it will have to wait until the files hit the hard drive. All while slowing down the entire internet and using more bandwidth.
