Hi, please:
Do I need Avast Antivirus Free with an external extra anti-exploit module (Malwarebytes) and anti-ransomware module (Bitdefender or Kaspersky)?
I know that extra security layers always are good, and lot of people use the combo I mentioned, and this combo works fine etc. This is not my question.
My concern is just about redundancy.
I just want to know if Avast Antivirus Free alone, is enough (or not) regarding anti-exploit and anti-ransomware security.
Thank you!
I just want to know if Avast Antivirus Free alone, is enough (or not) regarding anti-exploit and anti-ransomware security.Yes.Avast Free Antivirus is good it has good anti-exploit and decent behavior blocker which stop any types of Ransomwares.If you want to stay protected pls make your [b]backup[/b]. [b]So no need of extra anti-ransomware softs and anti-exploit.[/b]Hope it will help.
P.N-Avast also has avast hardened mode.Set it to Moderate.In extreme cases you can set it to Aggressive mode but normally set it to Moderate. 
@BeSecure, thank you!
Please, another question, if you let me: Avast Antivirus Premium has a separate anti-ransomware module. Why is that? Considering your answer, the Free Antivirus alone should be enough.
I don’t want redundancy in security! But in other hand, I see Malwarebytes separating anti-exploit module, or Bitdefender, Kaspersky and Avast Premium separating from Antivirus modules for anti-ransomware.
Why they separate modules from Antivirus?
Is it just a way to justify paid software? Or is it a matter of security that demands separate modules?
Avast Antivirus Premium has a separate anti-ransomware module. Why is that?Nice question@decopi. Because extra insurance is necessary to combat ever-evolving online threats,avast wanted to create a secure complement to Behavior Shield.
Why they separate modules from Antivirus?Ransomware Shield provides an added layer of protection by “walling off” most of your folders, as well as any specific folders you wish to select, for instance tax records or family photos.Avast Anti-Ransomware module is not standalone as Kaspersky or Bitdefender and Malwarebytes.
Is it just a way to justify paid software? Or is it a matter of security that demands separate modules?Both. :)
@BeSecure, thanks again,
I don’t like Internet Security Systems, or Prime products etc, because I don’t use most of the extra services there. For me: Good habits + Good Antivirus + Windows Firewall… is enough.
I totally love Avast Free, because has less impact on my system (than any other antivirus), and is reasonable good as a plain antivirus. Bitdefender Free is great, but consumes 7 times more RAM than Avast Free. In terms of performance + security, my vote is for Avast Free.
However, I am not sure about exploits and ransomware.
Still confuses me the fact that most of the free antivirus (Avast, Bitdefender etc) argue that “are enough”, but in upgraded software, all of them (including Microsoft) separate modules for anti-exploit or anti-ransomware.
I repeat, is not just Avast. All of them are equal. Bitdefender Free argues that is enough, but in paid version has a separate module for ransomware.
In theory and marketing, all free antivirus seem to be enough against exploits and ransomware.
But, in real life, all paid antivirus have an extra module for ransomware.
I am not really interested in this schizophrenia. But yes, I am interested in knowing the true (extra modules are necessary or are redundant?).
Malwarebytes free anti-exploit and Bitdefender free anti-ransomware, both have very low impact on my system.
I always hated redundancy with Avast Free.
But, considering that is not clear if extra modules are or are not redundant, and considering the low system impact, I believe that I will keep this combo (Avast Free + Malwarebytes Free Anti-Exploit + Bitdefender Free Ransomware).
Thanks again BeSecure!