Shocked to learn Windows Defender is so good now.

Messages
6,987
Location
Michigan
Thread starter
I have always run a 3rd party Antivirus/Malware program(s) as WD used to score poorly in testing. Now I see they score right up there with the rest. It appears I may have wasted some money on Bitdefender. I will probably drop it when it expires in a year. I wonder if they bought other companies scan engines or just hired good people to finally make a quality program.
 
Messages
10,434
Location
Cincinnati, OH, USA
I've never been able to figure out why Microsoft can't secure their own operating systems-if they don't know how it works, then nobody does! It's a shame Bill Gates is better at raking cash than building good software.
 
Messages
4,876
Location
NJ
I've always thought the risk of viruses and malware is vastly overblown. We have to take mandatory IT training at my job and the biggest risk is someone being tricked into running an executable file.
 
Messages
5,989
Location
Connecticut
Originally Posted by Leo99
I've always thought the risk of viruses and malware is vastly overblown. We have to take mandatory IT training at my job and the biggest risk is someone being tricked into running an executable file.
That's very true. We had a school district where some idiot clicked on ransomeware and didn't think it was something they should've done so they sent it to 10 other people asking them what it was. duh
 
Messages
3,617
Location
Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by bullwinkle
I've never been able to figure out why Microsoft can't secure their own operating systems-if they don't know how it works, then nobody does! It's a shame Bill Gates is better at raking cash than building good software.
I don't envy anyone who has to make all of their software backwards-compatible because of the tens of millions of corporate support contracts they have stretching back decades. Also, when you have some 90%+ of the desktop market share; and that 90%+ is likely to count among them the least technically-astute users, you're going to attract the miscreants' attention. A lot of malware finds itself on a users' system often through some action on the part of the user. It's closed-source, owned and run by a for-profit organization who may or may not choose to disclose and patch things. Open-source projects tend to be more responsive to and transparent with flaw. Windows works with a LOT of stuff and has a lot of services going on and a lot of ports open. Those functions cost in terms of complexity and security. I've given up on trying to stop myself from saying it: If you need privacy, security, stability, transparency and simplicity take a look at Ubuntu or some other Linux variant.
 
Messages
2,027
Location
WY
Microsoft owns what, 95% of the market? Open source has its downside for sure but the upside is magnitudes higher if you are a shareholder. The free A.V. that comes with Windows is the best. The big commercial's like Norton etc are actual viruses in and of themselves.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,466
Location
Maryland USA
Originally Posted by jeepman3071
Originally Posted by Leo99
I've always thought the risk of viruses and malware is vastly overblown. We have to take mandatory IT training at my job and the biggest risk is someone being tricked into running an executable file.
That's very true. We had a school district where some idiot clicked on ransomeware and didn't think it was something they should've done so they sent it to 10 other people asking them what it was. duh
Baltimore Government enters the chat .....
 
Messages
4,583
Location
Lima, Ohio, USA
oh.. thanks for the reminder... have kapersky free(when we got tired of Avast!'s Bloat ware) on the parents PC from when it was Win 7... now that my brother upgraded it to 10...I can Ditch Kapersky...
 
Last edited:

Pew

Messages
1,016
Location
Illinois
Originally Posted by Leo99
I've always thought the risk of viruses and malware is vastly overblown. We have to take mandatory IT training at my job and the biggest risk is someone being tricked into running an executable file.
Because bringing a law firm back up from a ransomware attack is NOT fun nor cheap. That was probably the one most annoying event ever of my career so far.
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,228
Location
South Carolina
The Windows world is secure, the world runs on windows, the press amplifies the issues. Also you can not "defend" against "stupid" People allowing programs/fake emails/etc to install rogue exploits in the vast majority of breaches, meaning the really bad ones. With that said, many years ago I would do routine scans with free virus protection, I never let them run full time. I too, believe Windows 10 Defender is the only program needed besides not being stupid. *LOL* Im in the Mac world now but still have 2 other Win 10 desktops and 2 Win 10 laptops.
 
Messages
687
Location
Indiana
Windows Defender is certainly competent and sufficient in most cases. However, just in the past week the pc security channel (TPSC) posted a video of WD being tested against a number of ransomware infection, most of which have been in the wild for a while. Surprisingly, it missed a few and the test machine was compromised (encrypted). Some of the subscription AV products do better in similar tests.
 
Messages
3,625
Location
Clermont, Florida
Originally Posted by Touring5
Windows Defender is certainly competent and sufficient in most cases. However, just in the past week the pc security channel (TPSC) posted a video of WD being tested against a number of ransomware infection, most of which have been in the wild for a while. Surprisingly, it missed a few and the test machine was compromised (encrypted). Some of the subscription AV products do better in similar tests.
I wonder if the Controlled Folder Access function of Windows Security/Defender was enabled on the test?
 
Messages
42,964
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by Pew
Originally Posted by Leo99
I've always thought the risk of viruses and malware is vastly overblown. We have to take mandatory IT training at my job and the biggest risk is someone being tricked into running an executable file.
Because bringing a law firm back up from a ransomware attack is NOT fun nor cheap. That was probably the one most annoying event ever of my career so far.
Been there, but with a doctor's office. Not fun at all. They have an ESET subscription now.
 
Messages
3,617
Location
Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Pew
Originally Posted by Leo99
I've always thought the risk of viruses and malware is vastly overblown. We have to take mandatory IT training at my job and the biggest risk is someone being tricked into running an executable file.
Because bringing a law firm back up from a ransomware attack is NOT fun nor cheap. That was probably the one most annoying event ever of my career so far.
Been there, but with a doctor's office. Not fun at all. They have an ESET subscription now.
I have to ask: Presuming the absence of a complete and recent backup of data, what does the process of recovering from ransomware entail? I'll also presume the data wasn't just .zip'ed with a password of "1234" but likely AES...
 
Messages
42,964
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by uc50ic4more
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Pew
Originally Posted by Leo99
I've always thought the risk of viruses and malware is vastly overblown. We have to take mandatory IT training at my job and the biggest risk is someone being tricked into running an executable file.
Because bringing a law firm back up from a ransomware attack is NOT fun nor cheap. That was probably the one most annoying event ever of my career so far.
Been there, but with a doctor's office. Not fun at all. They have an ESET subscription now.
I have to ask: Presuming the absence of a complete and recent backup of data, what does the process of recovering from ransomware entail? I'll also presume the data wasn't just .zip'ed with a password of "1234" but likely AES...
I had a complete and recent backup to work with thankfully. If you don't have a backup, you can use shadow copies if they weren't disabled by the rasomware. I've gone both routes. If they were? your last option, if it exists, is one of the ransomware unencryption tools by ESET or similar. But they only work with certain incarnations of the ransomware, so if you are hit by a really recent one you are screwed.
 
Messages
5,887
Location
Texas Hill Country
Originally Posted by uc50ic4more
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Pew
Originally Posted by Leo99
I've always thought the risk of viruses and malware is vastly overblown. We have to take mandatory IT training at my job and the biggest risk is someone being tricked into running an executable file.
Because bringing a law firm back up from a ransomware attack is NOT fun nor cheap. That was probably the one most annoying event ever of my career so far.
Been there, but with a doctor's office. Not fun at all. They have an ESET subscription now.
I have to ask: Presuming the absence of a complete and recent backup of data, what does the process of recovering from ransomware entail? I'll also presume the data wasn't just .zip'ed with a password of "1234" but likely AES...
Restore from backup.
 
Messages
4,228
Location
South Carolina
Originally Posted by Touring5
Windows Defender is certainly competent and sufficient in most cases. However, just in the past week the pc security channel (TPSC) posted a video of WD being tested against a number of ransomware infection, most of which have been in the wild for a while. Surprisingly, it missed a few and the test machine was compromised (encrypted). Some of the subscription AV products do better in similar tests.
Yes, but have to remember, this is the "modern press" finding/writing stories to fit the news for the sake of a click and ad revenue.. You can always find "better" in something, yet, that better might make your computer crash too or open a unchecked "back door" In Windows case, they are the most "tested" of all programs in the world hoping to find something to write a story about... for ... yup 'clicks" and ad revenue.
 
Last edited:
Messages
687
Location
Indiana
Originally Posted by uc50ic4more
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Pew
Originally Posted by Leo99
I've always thought the risk of viruses and malware is vastly overblown. We have to take mandatory IT training at my job and the biggest risk is someone being tricked into running an executable file.
Because bringing a law firm back up from a ransomware attack is NOT fun nor cheap. That was probably the one most annoying event ever of my career so far.
Been there, but with a doctor's office. Not fun at all. They have an ESET subscription now.
I have to ask: Presuming the absence of a complete and recent backup of data, what does the process of recovering from ransomware entail? I'll also presume the data wasn't just .zip'ed with a password of "1234" but likely AES...
I've never had to deal with any truly malicious infection before, there are free resources to decrypt some infections. I don't mean to be a pimp for TPSC, but he has a video that addresses your question https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0yXmQx89x4
 
Top