Panda Internet Security 2009 review
An improvement on last year's package, but sadly still flawed.
Review Date: 13 Feb 2009
Reviewed By: Darien Graham-Smith
Price when reviewed: £43 (£49 inc VAT)
Value for Money
Ease of Use
Panda is a popular choice in its native Spain, but we found its 2008 package offered poor protection and consumed too many system resources. This new version is a definite improvement but, as this month's results indicate, it still isn't a great all-rounder.
First, the good news: Panda's file-based malware detection is getting better. Last year it was placed firmly in the bottom half of the pack, but the 2009 edition's 87% score is only a short distance behind Labs winner Avira. It distinguished neatly between types of malware too, separating hacking tools and backdoors from adware, spyware and so forth - not that useful to the average user, perhaps, but interesting.
And in the network scan Panda performed as well as we could have asked, alerting us to the attack and shutting down connections from the attacking PC. Sadly, this wasn't repeated in our web threats test. With a hit rate of just 3%, we think it's fair to say that browser protection isn't Panda's strength. System resource usage wasn't as disastrous, but boot time and RAM footprint were still only average.
If you can live with those weaknesses, Panda has other good points: configuration is simple, and the antispam toolbar it inserts into Windows Mail is clear and easy to work with. We were also charmed by the occasional broken English ("please wait while the file is reconstructed") that hints at its exotic origin.
Nor is the price bad if you have three machines to protect. But ultimately, it's hard to recommend a package that offers such poor protection against web-based exploits.
Author: Darien Graham-Smith
- Poodle bug bites web users in the SSL
- 100,000 Snapchat messages leaked online
- Why security wasn't baked into the web - from the man who made it
- Met Police unveils FALCON to fight cybercrime
- Send a text and these SSDs will self-destruct
- iOS 8.0.2: old problems remain, new bugs added
- Apple patches ShellShock Bash bug
- Ello knocked offline by DDoS attack
- Mozilla patches Firefox NSS vulnerability
- Apple "working quickly" to fix Bash bug
- Google Glass: mugger bait, pub problem and other lessons learned from two dangerous weeks
- Twitter, please don't fiddle with my feed
- How Satya Nadella can get some pay-raise karma
- Windows 10: a step back to go forward
- Michael Dell: Cloud infrastructure is the roads, bridges and highways of the 21st century
- How to check your identity hasn’t been sold to the hackers
- Tim Cook: this is how much TV has changed since the 70s
- Westminster wins the .London battle
- 20 years of PC Pro: from deep pan pizza to virtualisation
- Five reasons why the Apple Watch leaves me cold
- Five worst SMB security threats... and how to solve them
- Heartbleed: what you need to know and do
- Measuring me: is your body the future of security?
- The top five consumer security threats for 2014
- Windows XP: Microsoft’s ticking time bomb
- The top five SMB security trends for 2014
- Securing the Internet of Things
- My PC is infected: what now?
- When coding becomes a crime
- Mobile web blocking: what it reveals about porn filtering plans
- How to write your company's IT security policy
- The key to choosing a secure password
- Please stop reposting fake Facebook messages
- Is Facebook safe for business?
- Don't rely on Chrome's password vault
- Facebook Graph Search: don't panic
- Gmail drafts and Pastebin: could they evade the email snoops?
- Applying for a job at GCHQ? Here's your plain-text password
- Google two-step verification: a must for business email
- Yes, I write down my passwords