F-Secure Internet Security - Review 2022

Security companies typically offer a simple antivirus, a baseline security suite, and a characteristic-rich mega-suite, ofttimes with protection across multiple platforms. In that schema, F-Secure Internet Security is the Windows-simply baseline suite. If you're using it already, you tin keep installing the latest upgrades. However, F-Secure is pushing new users to the cross-platform F-Secure Safe mega-suite, which includes the same protection every bit this suite for Windows boxes but too supports macOS, Android, and iOS. Nosotros will review F-Secure Safe separately, covering the other platforms.

At $69.99 per year for iii licenses, F-Secure is a bit below the usual price. Bitdefender, Kaspersky, and Trend Micro Internet Security all toll about $10 more. Notation, besides, that F-Secure offers a wider variety of multi-license packs than virtually any competitor. Choices range from $49.99 per twelvemonth for a single license to $279.99 per twelvemonth for 25. Pricing is the same for the cantankerous-platform F-Secure Rubber, except that the one and two license choices are absent.

A few other companies offer super-sized bundles. Kaspersky Security Cloud gives you lot 20 cross-platform licenses for $149.99. BullGuard and Norton give you x for $99.95 and $109.99 respectively. And an $89.99 subscription to McAfee AntiVirus Plus gets you unlimited licenses to install on all your Windows, macOS, Android, and iOS devices.

Like F-Secure'due south standalone antivirus, this production has an airy, streamlined chief window, with lots of whitespace. A status indicator dominates the chief window, with a push to launch a virus browse and a link to settings. Tabs at left let yous switch from this main screen to a page of tools and to the parental control system. Notation that the Statistics folio has departed; my contact at F-Secure tells me it volition return, improved, in a coming version.

In addition, F-Secure dropped the simple spam filter due to lack of interest. That'southward no surprise; defended local spam filtering isn't something most people need.

Shared Antivirus Features

The core antivirus features of this suite are, for the nearly part, precisely the same as what you get with F-Secure Anti-Virus. The 1 big difference is that the suite integrates with your browsers to keep you clear of malicious and fraudulent websites. I'll summarize those shared features here. Naturally you can dig into the standalone antivirus review for total details.

Lab Test Results Nautical chart Malware Protection Results Chart

All four of the contained antivirus testing labs that I follow include F-Secure in their reports. Its test scores are all good, just not groovy. I use an algorithm to map all the scores on to a x-point scale and create an aggregate lab score. F-Secure's score of 8.five is decent. Still, Kaspersky Internet Security, Avira, and Bitdefender, besides tested by all 4 labs, came in at 9.ix, 9.7, and 9.5 points respectively.

In my own hands-on malware protection exam, F-Secure detected 93 percent of the samples and earned 9.3 of 10 possible points. That's the best score amongst products tested using my current sample prepare. Note, though, that I've simply tested three other products since introducing this sample ready.

Tests using previous samples sets aren't directly comparable, naturally. Withal, it'southward worth noting that Norton and Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus both scored a perfect 10.

F-Secure's standalone antivirus does not include the browser protection component plant in this suite. However, information technology does accept a new advanced network protection characteristic that successfully blocked access to many malware-hosting sites in my testing. The implementation proved bad-mannered, though. The browser displayed an mistake bulletin stating that the site declined to show the requested page. Shortly afterward, a transient notification explained that F-Secure had prevented access. Including malware that F-Secure eliminated later on download, the antivirus scored 86 percentage protection. That's amend than boilerplate, just Symantec Norton Security Premium managed 98 percent, and Trend Micro 97 percent.

Browsing protection in the suite installs as a browser extension, and it proved significantly more constructive. Overall, the suite achieved 96 percent protection, putting it in third identify behind Norton and Trend Micro. In near every case, information technology diverted the browser to a page stating that F-Secure blocked a harmful site. It described a few sites as suspicious, rather than harmful. In two instances (out of 100) the advanced network protection did the job, and in another 2 the regular real-time protection wiped out the download.

F-Secure'due south real-time protection wiped out all my ransomware samples, equally these are known quantities. The real ransomware threat comes from cypher-day attacks. Information technology doesn't matter if the antivirus can detect the ransomware a 24-hour interval or even an hour later, as the harm is already done. To simulate naught-day attacks, I turned off the regular real-fourth dimension protection, leaving only the DeepGuard behavioral and ransomware-specific components active.

DeepGuard detected and quarantined all my file-encrypting malware samples after launch, without losing a single file to encryption. Nonetheless, information technology did nothing to protect against the Petya disk-encrypting ransomware. And when I configured 1 of the ransomware samples to launch at startup, it completed its encryption mission without F-Secure's observe. It's truthful that this exam doesn't use actual zero-day ransomware—by definition, if I accept a sample it's non zip-solar day. But it does seem to show a weakness in the behavior-based detection.

And so-So Phishing Protection

The same browsing protection that did so well against malware-hosting URLs also aims to steer users away from fraudulent websites, phishing sites that attempt to steal their login credentials. However, when I put this function to the test it didn't do so well.

To prepare for this examination, I scrape hundreds of reported phishing URLs from sites that track such things. I aim to use the URLs that haven't yet been analyzed and blacklisted. I use a mitt-coded programme to launch each URL in plough and record that the antivirus defenseless it, the antivirus missed it, or it wasn't a phishing site after all.

In the past I have run this test on five systems simultaneously. The product under exam protects ane, of course, and I've used Norton on another, every bit a touchstone. The remaining three rely on the protection built into Chrome, Firefox, and Internet Explorer. I did information technology this way because Norton consistently exhibited high detection rates, and the browser results varied a lot.

In contempo tests, including this one, Norton has proven less consistently authentic, and the browsers have upped their game. Starting with this review, I'thousand comparison test products to the 3 browsers only, and averaging the results. Click the link below to see the revised nautical chart.

Phishing Protection Results Chart

More than than half of the current products outperformed all three browsers. About another 30 percent beat out at least one of the browsers. F-Secure lies in that dismal residue, beaten soundly by congenital-in protection in all iii browsers. Information technology lagged their average detection rate past 18 per centum.

When comparing against Norton was the touchstone, Bitdefender owned this test, scoring 12 percentage points better. In the new scheme of things Cheque Signal ZoneAlarm Extreme Security is at the tiptop, beating the browser average past a total 52 percent, with Bitdefender second at 49 percent. The decision here is clear. If you're using F-Secure for protection, don't plough off what'south congenital into the browser.

See How We Test Security Software

Banking Protection

While online security is always important, information technology'southward peculiarly urgent during sensitive online action such equally banking. Quite a few suites offer extra protection to go on spyware from snooping on sensitive online activity. For example, Bitdefender includes Safepay in all products, starting with the antivirus. Kaspersky's suites offer Safe Money, which specifically isolates the protected browser from other processes. Yous get Bank Way in Avast'south product line, starting with the free antivirus.

Bank Mode in Avast Pro Antivirus and Bitdefender's Safepay open up a separate desktop for secure browsing. Kaspersky'southward Safe Money isolates the browser process from other products, flagging the secure browser with a green border. All three kick in automatically on detecting a fiscal site.

Banking protection in F-Secure also activates automatically for fiscal sites, but it operates a bit differently. When you connect to a fiscal site, information technology blocks all other connections and displays a banner stating that cyberbanking protection is agile. Buttons let you hide the imprint, or end the protection session. There'southward no existent reason to hide it, every bit after a moment it rolls up to a sparse line at the superlative of the screen.

In testing, information technology clearly worked. The banner appeared when I opened a banking company site, as it should. And when I attempted to connect elsewhere with a different browser, I got an explanatory page advising me to end my banking first. A data-stealing Trojan wouldn't get that message, but neither would it be able to capture and transmit your private data.

Banking protection does exactly what it says, but I'thou non certain information technology's every bit completely protective as some of the contest. It seems believable to me that, for example, a data stealer could capture your individual data and wait to transport it until banking protection concluded. The other products I mention isolate the entire browser process rather than simply preventing other connections.

Limited, Awkward Parental Control

Not every parent wants or needs a parental control system in a security suite. For those that do desire this characteristic, a organisation that applies to all the devices used by each child is a modern must. Information technology's no use limiting screen fourth dimension on the PC when your kid can merely switch to the iPad. F-Secure doesn't remotely attain this cross-platform control, and what information technology does do in PC-only mode is seriously limited, fifty-fifty more so than in the final version I reviewed.

To plow on the parental control system, click the Parental Controls tab at left. You click the big Turn on button to "fix time limits and block unwanted content." Next you confirm that you want the default settings; in that location'south no option to immediately customize. Congratulations; you've just prepare up parental controls for yourself. Yes, the merely way to configure parental controls for a given Windows account is to log into that account and do the job. I've never seen that earlier. It's worth noting that at the time of my previous review, y'all could manage all accounts without logging in to each.

And so, you lot must log into each kid's Windows account (you lot do know their passwords, right?) and turn on parental controls. Common wisdom is that children should have Standard user accounts, without Administrator privilege. Even when y'all're logged in on a Standard account, yous can turn parental controls on with default settings. If yous want to make changes to the settings yous'll take to supply the password for an Administrator account.

For each business relationship, don't forget to launch each browser and install the F-Secure browser add-on. Some of the parental control features don't work without the addition. Notation, though, that any kid, even one with a limited-permission Standard user account, tin disable or remove the add-ons.

F-Secure can block access to websites matching 15 color-coded categories. In the cerise category you'll observe Adult, Disturbing, Drugs, Gambling, Alcohol and tobacco, Illegal, and Illegal downloads, all blocked by default. Yellow categories are Violence, Hate, Weapons, Dating, and Shopping, all but the last blocked by default. In the blueish realm are Social networks, Anonymizers, and Unknown, the first two blocked by default. Yes, if yous don't modify or turn off control for you own account, you tin forget most Facebook.

In testing, the content filter worked well, even in a totally unknown browser that I wrote myself. Your kids won't get past it using a secure anonymizing proxy. Not merely did it block the HTTPS anonymizer, it displayed the same bulletin as for non-secure sites (some parental control systems can't manage that feat, merely showing a browser error for blocked HTTPS sites).

But at that place's a catch, and it'southward a large 1. Correct on the warning page is a big push labeled Allow web site. If y'all've given your child an Ambassador account (to avoid the hassle of coming over and logging in all the time) then clicking that push button just grants access. Under a Standard account, that button withal appears, just it doesn't practice anything.

For that matter, a child with an Administrator account can simply turn off parental controls. There's no provision for locking them down with a countersign. A child with a Standard account can't make any changes, though.

By default, the search issue filter is off. If you lot turn it on, F-Secure forces safe search in Google, Yahoo, Bing, and YouTube. In testing, I found that this feature successfully prevented disabling safe search, but only with the browser extension agile. If your kid uses a little-known browser or disables the extension, that's the end of search result filtering.

F-Secure does offer a thorough time limit system, letting parents put a daily cap on estimator use or merely on internet use. The cap is 2 hours past default, but y'all tin can fix anywhere from one to seven hours, or set no limit. The screen time system as well defines a schedule for every day of the week, in one-hour increments. By default, it permits access from 8am to 8pm each solar day.

F-Secure doesn't rely on the organization clock to manage its schedule. A smart-aleck kid with Administrator access can't tweak the clock to access the internet outside the immune time. However, there's a loophole here too. The time-out warning includes a Modify time limits push button, and again, a child with an Ambassador account tin can elevator the limit. If you chose to lock the calculator, a warning screen hides the desktop, but it has an Extend… push.

A child who has a Standard account can't tweak the time limits; the Modify time limits push does nothing. If you lot've limited overall computer use, clicking the Extend… button pops up a request for an administrator password.

That's information technology for parental control. It'due south all local to the PC, with a bare minimum of features. And you don't go any reports on what the kids have been searching for, or what sites the system blocked.

Bitdefender Cyberspace Security and Kaspersky are among the suite products that offer full-calibration parental control, rivaling what y'all get from the best standalone products. F-Secure, by contrast, offers a Windows-merely solution with a uniquely awkward configuration system. Some features don't piece of work in unknown browsers, and for those older kids with Administrator accounts, it's no use at all.

To exist fair, parental command in F-Secure Safe is a modern, cross-platform, remotely managed system. When you lot install Prophylactic on a Windows PC, most features are the same as with F-Secure Internet Security, only parental command is a modern remotely managed system.

Small Functioning Impact

The days of bloated security dinosaurs sucking upward system resources are long over. Well-nigh modern products range from almost no performance impact to not very much. But I still notice it worthwhile to run some unproblematic performance touch on tests.

For many years I used the same sometime, underpowered PC for performance testing. How many years? Well, out of the box this Sony VAOI ran Windows XP Media Center Edition; y'all exercise the math. Information technology finally died. This is the beginning time I've used the new performance testing system (an ASUS laptop). Since the scores study a per centum change from the baseline rather than raw numbers, I don't anticipate any large trouble with the switch. Even so, in the chart beneath you'll see I've added a cavalcade chosen New to indicate products that used the new testbed.

Performance Results Chart

To measure boot time, I apply a script that launches at startup and waits for ten seconds in a row with less than five percent CPU usage. At that point, I declare that the computer is fix to use. Subtracting the start of the kicking process (as reported by Windows) yields the boot time. I average multiple runs with no suite, and multiple runs after installing the suite. With F-Secure installed, the boot procedure took 24 percent longer. Sympathise, though, that on the speedy new testbed this 24 percent represents about eight seconds. Yous'd hardly notice that.

Most people permit PCs go to sleep when not in employ, rebooting merely when they must, and then an increment in boot fourth dimension doesn't necessarily mean much. Slowing down mean solar day-to-day file manipulation activities could be more of a drag. To exam that, I repeatedly run a script that moves and copies an eclectic collection of files between drives. That script averaged 19 per centum longer with F-Secure installed, more many competing products, but still not bad. A script that zips and unzips the aforementioned set of files over and over ran just one percentage longer nether F-Secure.

Averaging F-Secure's scores we get an overall performance hit of 15 percent, putting it merely below the center of the pack. That doesn't look quite every bit good when you realize that the average impact for adaware antivirus total, Webroot, and Norton was a big fatty zero.

Go With Prophylactic

F-Secure Net Security is on the way out. It's difficult to fifty-fifty download and install it, every bit the website redirects you lot to the more than capable F-Secure Safe. If y'all're already using it, you tin can keep upgrading, just switching to Safety would be a better plan. The antivirus component gets decent scores from the labs, and in our tests. Suite-specific browser protection aced our malicious URLs test, but dropped the brawl on phishing protection. And the already-limited parental command system has a uniquely awkward configuration way.

If you're not a dice-hard F-Secure aficionado, consider using one of our Editors' Selection products. In the entry-level suite arena, Bitdefender Internet Security and Kaspersky Internet Security are the winners. Both provide a much broader feature selection than F-Secure, both include full-fledged parental control, and both go peak marks from the independent antivirus labs.

Sub-Ratings:
Annotation: These sub-ratings contribute to a product's overall star rating, as do other factors, including ease of use in existent-world testing, bonus features, and overall integration of features.
Firewall: n/a
Antivirus:
Functioning:
Privacy:
Parental Control:

Source: https://sea.pcmag.com/software/28224/f-secure-internet-security

Posted by: boylesmaland.blogspot.com

Share this post