Microsoft Security Essentials is not good enough

[NathanE]

How about protection at the point of infection, not detection?

That doesn't even make sense.

How about.perfect clean-up routines.

No AV software these days seem to be capable of removing rootkits. Considering 80% of malware that successfully infect these days are rootkits, what is the point?

That's one of the biggest reasons people are ditching AV altogether. Because the last time they got infected it just sat there. Constantly popping up "You are infected" dialogs but not actually being capable of doing anything about it. Even if you press the disinfect button, within seconds or after a reboot the virus would come back in full force again.

 

[Burnsy2023]

I'm surprised to hear you say that you're happy to "deal with the consequences" rather than take proactive steps to protect your data.

Who actually stores their credit card details in a wordpad anyway? I certainly don't.

There's nothing exciting on my computer that a super virus could come along and upload to the Nigerian. All he would find is is my general files which would serve no purpose to him. So what if he gets my CV. My name and address are publicly available on the internet anyway. Most peoples are via the electoral role or the phone book.

Absolutely. The age old principle of information security: it's a balance between absolute security and usability. To quote Gene Spafford:

“The only system which is truly secure is one which is switched off and unplugged, locked in a titanium lined safe, buried in a concrete bunker, and is surrounded by nerve gas and very highly paid armed guards. Even then, I wouldn't stake my life on it.”

The fact is these attacks happen every day, they've probably happened to you, and you have no idea.

Like I said earlier, if it requires a host process on my machine then I will notice it. If it doesn't then it can only get to my stored files in which case the majority of my information is safe.

Theses types of attacks aren't nearly as common as you suggest. You've got a solution to a problem that isn't really a problem.

 

[madindehead]

What's your problem? You've contributed nothing to this thread and now you've resorted to frivolous one-liners because you've clearly got nothing intelligent to say about this subject.

Basically, your entire argument has been fairly wishy-washy and not really contained any substance. Like Burnsy2023 said, most people are happy to live with the consequences, since no system can be 100% sure. And even then, a lot of it comes down to intelligent use.

One test, from a group no one has even heard of, doesn't really prove much.

Yes, ideally we should all have better protection. But no one here pretends that MSE is the be all and end all of security products like you are claiming they are. I've found it to be the least annoying of secure software, and several people I know use it, and never have problems. A lot of it is down to the user.

If you really need a sandbox on your system to check every file you download or install, maybe you need to take a long look at your sources and your own internet usage, instead of a blasting a perfectly good product.

 

[PapaLazaru]

If you really need a sandbox on your system to check every file you download or install, maybe you need to take a long look at your sources and your own internet usage, instead of a blasting a perfectly good product.

This. The only people I know who get viruses are parents, sisters and kids who don't know better.

For the average user on OcUK, who knows their way arouind the internet, MSE is perfectly adequate.

 

[Deleted member 77746]

I quoted the only accurate part of your post.

If you're really interested I could post a more detailed comparison for you in the morning. In the mean-time you could re-read my previous comment about the London Stock Exchange web site, hopefully that will mean something to you - MSE and MWB did not protect the hundreds of thousands of users who were infected by that threat.

bye

 

[neoglow]

This. The only people I know who get viruses are parents, sisters and kids who don't know better.

That made me chuckle, its true though.

 

[Burnsy2023]

I quoted the only accurate part of your post.

If you're really interested I could post a more detailed comparison for you in the morning. In the mean-time you could re-read my previous comment about the London Stock Exchange web site, hopefully that will mean something to you - MSE and MWB did not protect the hundreds of thousands of users who were infected by that threat.

Where did you get hundreds of thousands from? Just because the LSE get's hundreds of thousands of hits, doesn't mean they all result in infections.

 

[LtMatt]

I se MSE along with malware bytes for an added layer of security.

MSE is great and hardly uses any resources.

 

[edscdk]

That doesn't even make sense.



No AV software these days seem to be capable of removing rootkits. Considering 80% of malware that successfully infect these days are rootkits, what is the point?

I never understand this, as combofix almost always removes them, and the odd ones it cannot remove, the kaspersky one can remove...

 

[davedudes]

I use MSE and have had no problems with it, my parents however are online now, the thing is i'm constantly sitting with them saying "DON'T CLICK ON THAT AD FFS!!!". They learn quick, also a bit of common sense goes a long way too.

 

[ShakenNstirred]

im surprised he gets anything done on his pc with checking the web everyday for new info on virus`s
you can be to anal about things

 

[Burnsy2023]

you can be to anal about things

On that note, this is an apostrophe ' this is a backtick ` They are not the same.

 

[mrk]

Maybe that was a deliberate trap!

 

[Levirginien]

Guarantee based on what?
Not going to start a to and fro with you.
Your results suggest mwb is virtually the best, issue being in its base form it is an on demand scanner and thus would score absolutely zero, if the user didnt run it.
It can be bought in other forms.
Anyway i still recommend mse and mwb in combo with uac on and basic stupidity switched off.
This free, low footprint, inobtrusive approach i find to be effective.

+1
Anyway i still recommend mse and mwb in combo with uac on and basic stupidity switched off.

 

[alex24]

It's easy to recommend MSE if you've had no problems with it. The thing is, you shouldn't be choosing an AV based on that alone.

I tried out Panda AVPro 2011 (free disc from OcUK at LITS) as a replacement for MSE and on the first full scan it picked up 12 items that MSE never found (and I scan regularly/forthnightly), including trojans. Don't get me wrong, Panda is inferior in lots of other ways (more expensive, poor layout, not as responsive and so on), but it did the end job better.

 

[Gtiracer]

http://malwareresearchgroup.com/malware-tests/flash-test-results/

Time and time again I see security experts on this forum recommending MSE over-and-above other solutons, with the most common reason being "it's used in forefront by businesses so must be good" or "I've used it for years and never been infected".

The fact is malware has changed.

MSE protects you at the point of detection, not infection. How do you know you have never had a virus?

Malware these days is targeted and lots of viruses delete themselves. You may have been infected for a few minutes, hours or days. By the time Microsoft have written a signature for the threat and your machine has downloaded it, it's too late - and you have no idea that your data has been stolen.

Please stop recommending MSE on this forum without doing some more research.

How you can have a go at people for not doing more research and post one dodgy source is beyond me.

Do you not have any other sources of information that back up your claim?

 

[N$X]

i have been contaminated with several virus's before and MSE has never been able to remove the malware.

from my personal experience i have never found MSE useful. i get the odd windows alert, stating my pc requires a scan, which i let it do.

my kaspersky internet security does the trick.

 

[Kotu]

its more of a balancing act where you want to have some protection without performance loss and without it being too intrusive. I never really bothered with anti virus until I got a SSD as all the active monitor programs really killed my computer performance and some of them would generate more random popups than getting infected would

Also I had some bad memories of using norton, it would break every pc i tried using it on. Things like adjusting security settings which would make the internet unusable but then not reversing the changes once uninstalled forcing a windows reinstall.

MSE might not be the best for zero day infections, but the nature of these kind of viruses means its impossible to be the best. It does however stop you getting infected with old viruses.

sensible browsing and an adblocker probably help the most, the only way you get infected then is if one of your trusted sites gets hacked and infected directly.

 

[mrbios]

Ok so i've just read through the whole thread and all i've gathered is this: Egotistical know it all says MSE is crap but doesn't give an actual product name as to what he recommends instead.

AV = intrusive into my daily use of a computer, MSE is a rare one that isn't. For ME i'd rather use no AV at all than use most of the junk that's around. MSE uses sod all resources and doesn't get in the way, i'll use that until they day MS **** it up - end of the day i'd rather reinstall in the VERY unlikely event i'm infected by something that can't be removed than use a resource hog/intrusive piece of software that'll bug me daily.

No idea where you get off coming on to a forum and simply telling everyone they're wrong and you're right with no real proof but a pile of crap website with a random table of results, find me some reputable sites to believe at least. The only argument you should be having is that perhaps when people recommend an AV program their response should be something more like this: "If you want something to just sit in the background and do a good job of getting rid of known viri and malware without using much system resources or being intrusive into daily use then use MSE, if you want top security for zero day threats but a bit of a system hog and an annoyance then use xxxxxx" being a forum called overclockers though i'd figure most will opt for the MSE route.

 

[AWPC]

MSE is fine just ensure you configure it using common sense don't just accept the default scan settings. MS know the best way to protect their own OS

IMO most viruses now use Java & Flash to deliver the payload to your PC & can leave some nasty hard to clean infections. You would be amazed how many home users have horrible Java based viruses which avoid detection & sit in the background waiting to strike.