[nfbcs] most accessible virus/malware protection?

Thu Jan 15 18:03:10 UTC 2015

Gary,
You raise an interesting question. It would be useful and quite 
wonderful if magazines such as Cnet, PC World, etc. evaluated 
accessibility along with the other usability-related sections in their 
reviews. However, in order for them to adequately perform this task the 
reviewer would need to be well-versed with today's group of screen 
readers and screen enlargers. Can we expect these reviewers to know 
JAWS, Window-Eyes and MAGic the way they know Excel, Word and 
Powerpoint. I honestly doubt it. However, perhaps we need to talk about 
how people like us can assist them in their reviews as it's users like 
us who are the experts. Apple has gotten a great deal of attention in 
the mainstream press due to their commitment to accessibility. With 
Windows products, accessibility becomes the subject of an occasional 
"how do the blind use a computer" piece. I'm not sure what the answer is 
but I think that engaging in a dialog with some of these publishers 
would be a good first step.

David Goldfield,

      Founder and Peer Coordinator,
Philadelphia Computer Users' Group for the Blind and Visually Impaired

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

Gary Wunder wrote:
> 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
>
>
>