[nfbcs] most accessible virus/malware protection?

Thu Jan 15 16:41:50 UTC 2015

Hello, David. I think you have dispensed a few pieces of advice that are
really good, and I'm sure that you do more than just preach about the issue.
I wonder if it might be a good idea to write to the mainstream computer
magazines that do these reviews and suggest that they add accessibility as
an important criteria in their evaluations.

-----Original Message-----
From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of David Goldfield
via nfbcs
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 3:33 AM
To: Nicole Torcolini; NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfbcs] most accessible virus/malware protection?

I'd like to weigh in on this interesting and very important discussion. 
Nicole raises a valid point here; an accessible piece of software doesn't
necessarily mean that it's the best piece of software. Please don't be
offended at what I'm about to say because I consider myself in the same camp
but blind people, myself included, are really funny when it comes to which
software we use, particularly on our Windows machines. 
We go with what works with our screen readers and not necessarily with the
best choice. Again, when I say blind people I think of myself in this
category. Usually, more often than not, this is out of necessity and not out
of laziness. I remember in the early 2000's when I was hearing so much about
Firefox but those of us using screen readers were forced to use Internet
Explorer. Firefox may have been a cool, awesome browser but with blind
computer users it had 100% of the market share because, if you're going to
use Windows with a screen reader, IE was the only game in town at that time.
In the late 1990's I remember what a pleasure it was to use Norton Antivirus
on my Windows 98 machine as it was totally accessible, menu bar and all. As
Norton began to morph into a Web page type interface, I and probably lots of
other blind people discovered AVG, which was amazing when it came to
accessibility. Not only did version 7.5 have standard controls and a menu
bar but it even had the ability to redefine all of its hotkeys. I didn't
actually know if the program was highly rated but I used it because it was
highly accessible. Version 8 of AVG removed the ability to redefine hotkeys
and, while the UI changed, it was still 99.9% accessible. However, as the
program became more difficult to use with my screen reader, I and, from what
I remember, every other blind person discovered Avast. It was, for the most
part, fairly accessible but, at one point, a new version came out which I
believe was version 5 and accessibility was gone. While they promised
accessibility would return, I refused to keep using 4.7 and promptly removed
it. Now, the majority of blind people, myself included, seem to be
gravitating toward Microsoft Security Essentials. 
At one point, the program seemed to be received favorably but it has failed
virus tests and has gotten some very bad press. I hesitate to recommend it
to most people. I admit I use it but I'm also a very cautious,
security-conscious user and, between my script blockers, ad blocker and my
own cautiousness I've never been hit with malware while using MSE. The point
is that most of us, at least many of us, tend to gravitate toward pieces of
software which are screen reader friendly rather than trying to work with
the most highly-rated packages which might not work with JAWS, NVDA,
Window-Eyes or Supernova.
This is an issue I've thought about for some time and I think that some
proactive work and activism are in order and this is an area I'd like to see
the NFB take the lead with. First, we as blind people need to collectively
contact the manufacturers of software we want to use and let them know about
the problems and accessibility issues which we are experiencing with their
software. I try to do this when I can but I admit that, when it comes to
security software, I'm just as guilty as anyone else of installing what
works with my screen reader and being thankful that I have at least one
piece of security software that actually talks to me. I have engaged in my
own activism, however, and sometimes it can be effective. With the case of
Malwarebytes, I contacted them via their online forum. Online forums are, in
my opinion, a very useful tool to politely inform a software vendor about
accessibility problems because your message, being in a public forum for
everyone to see, sometimes forces them to respond because a company doesn't
want to be seen ignoring its users. Also, it not only educates them about
the issues you're having but it makes other people aware of them as well.
While I'm sure I wasn't the only reason or even the main reason for this,
MalwareBytes, while not perfect, is now reasonably accessible with screen
readers. Was my message primarily responsible for this? Probably not, if I'm
going to be realistic about it but it may have lit a bit more of a fire
under the company to move on the issue.
I'd also like to see the NFB Assistive Technology Blog or AFB's Access world
conduct usability reviews of the top security programs, such as AVG, Avast,
MalwareBytes, AdAware, etc. Mainstream magazines conduct annual reviews of
security software and rate them on how well they catch viruses, clean up an
infected system, the speed of the scans, etc. We need to conduct similar
reviews on these packages such as how keyboard friendly are they,
accessibility of the settings dialog boxes, etc, providing another way of
holding the companies accountable for their product's shortcomings and at
the same time informing both them and potential users about products which
we should use and support.
I admit that most of us, myself included, don't have the resources to use an
isolated computer with a variety of packages to compose product reviews.
However, what we can all do as individuals is to contact vendors of these
packages and let them know what our issues are. You can do so privately or
via an online forum, which is an approach I prefer to use for reasons I've
already stated. One thing that I do is to offer my services to them
volunteering to provide beta testing for them for the purpose of providing
accessibility-related feedback. I hope this message might be of some help to
those who are struggling with using an inaccessible or partially accessible
piece of software. As I'm not a person who hands out lots of good-sounding
advice and does nothing about it, I would like to offer my services if I can
assist any of you in this endeavor.

Feel free to visit my new Web site
http://www.DavidGoldfield.info

Feel free to visit my LinkedIn profile
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/david-goldfield/12/929/573

Visit my blog
http://davidgoldfield.wordpress.com

Follow me on Twitter
http://www.twitter.com/davidgoldfield

         David Goldfield,
        Founder and Peer Coordinator

    Philadelphia Computer Users' Group for the Blind and Visually Impaired
To learn more about the users' group, visit
http://davidgoldfield.wordpress.com/2014/04/20/updated-faqphiladelphia-compu
ter-users-group-for-the-blind-and-visually-impaired/

On 1/13/2015 11:06 PM, Nicole Torcolini via nfbcs wrote:
> Are you also concerned about how good it is? Microsoft Security 
> Essentials may be accessible, but, from my personal experience, it 
> does not catch everything. Just my two cents.
>
> Nicole
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike 
> Freeman via nfbcs
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 7:54 AM
> To: 'David W Bundy'; 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] most accessible virus/malware protection?
>
> Microsoft security essentials
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of David W 
> Bundy via nfbcs
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 7:14 AM
> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> Subject: [nfbcs] most accessible virus/malware protection?
>
> I have a consumer asking about the most accessible virus/malware 
> protection available.  Since my expïrience is limited to what I've 
> actually used, I thought I would throw it out to everyone for suggestions.
>
> David W Bundy
> West Columbia, SC
> bundy at pobox.com
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> nfbcs mailing list
> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfbcs:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbcs mailing list
> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfbcs:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/ntorcolini%40waveca
> ble.co
> m
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbcs mailing list
> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfbcs:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/happycatholic1211%4
> 0aol.com
>

_______________________________________________
nfbcs mailing list
nfbcs at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nfbcs:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/gwunder%40earthlink.net