Microsoft scores poorly in latest virus protection test for Windows 7

[MTS2000des]

Good. I never one time said you were ignorant. If that is what you choose to derive from what I wrote, you need to work on your confidence.

So...are you through waving your EF Johnson around or are you ready to provide some solid factual links, documents, case studies of Windows 7/8 having superior enterprise grade security. That is what this thread is about, not who's operating system/radio/car/cellphone is better.

Only a fool would argue that Microsoft Windows does not have serious security issues, always has, and always will. I'll give you a hint, many of the recent credit/debit card breaches go right to unsecured Windows based POS systems, wireless network connections running on Windows machines...is much of this user error? Maybe. But the fact is, there are so many holes in the wall that it's practically a sieve. The excuse that "there are more Windows boxes means they are more a target to hackers" is lame. All the more reason why Microsoft should tighten the fortress. But as facts have shown, they fall short of even the basics.

This is also the response from somebody who works on computers every day and knowing that education is the most valuable resource us geeks can lend to users. The sad thing is many times it falls on def ears and a machine I work on today will probably be back next week with the same issue all user error.

I don't disagree one bit. But as professionals, we must ASSume that no one will RTFM. Users don't have the time, or attention span these days to sit through a two to four hour course on basic, what you and I would consider, common sense PC/network security basics. They login, go to their apps, Facebook and whatever other garbage they waste hours online doing (like this forum!).

The operating system should not be so venerable by default. Sure, MS has made some strides, but when a user can get a machine completely overtaken by a bot for merely visiting a webpage, that points to a poorly designed O/S that allows too much to happen with no intervention/permissions. And I'm talking about Windows 7 FWIW.

You assume way to much. Notice how I said "me" many times? That is my opinion and if I am not mistaken, I did say to use whatever works for you? I don't know better then you what might work for you.

Sure, I get you like Windows 8. But that isn't what the thread is about per se, it's about Windows 7 security, or lack thereof. You are entitled to your opinion as am I. Documentation exists showing that Windows 7 has security issues as the OP provided in the original link. My or your opinion doesn't change facts.

 

[corbintechboy]

So...are you through waving your EF Johnson around or are you ready to provide some solid factual links, documents, case studies of Windows 7/8 having superior enterprise grade security. That is what this thread is about, not who's operating system/radio/car/cellphone is better.

Only a fool would argue that Microsoft Windows does not have serious security issues, always has, and always will. I'll give you a hint, many of the recent credit/debit card breaches go right to unsecured Windows based POS systems, wireless network connections running on Windows machines...is much of this user error? Maybe. But the fact is, there are so many holes in the wall that it's practically a sieve. The excuse that "there are more Windows boxes means they are more a target to hackers" is lame. All the more reason why Microsoft should tighten the fortress. But as facts have shown, they fall short of even the basics.

It was never about my Johnson . This is just a tired argument. I have fought on both sides on many occasions and it accomplishes nothing.

I will state that in my opinion the UAC was a big upgrade to security for Windows. Sure, if you browse the internet (since most viruses/malware come from the internet) you are at the mercy of the browser and to some extent the OS. For example, my chromebook is very secure. But this is not exclusive to Windows. As soon as Windows fails it is written for something else.

I don't disagree one bit. But as professionals, we must ASSume that no one will RTFM. Users don't have the time, or attention span these days to sit through a two to four hour course on basic, what you and I would consider, common sense PC/network security basics. They login, go to their apps, Facebook and whatever other garbage they waste hours online doing (like this forum!).

I agree!

I have also had this argument many times.

I think people should be trained to use computers. Without training they cannot be used. Ignorance puts us all in danger and is no excuse. Yet ignorant users are created every minute of every day and a small amount will become educated while the majority are click bots waiting for the next infection.

The operating system should not be so venerable by default. Sure, MS has made some strides, but when a user can get a machine completely overtaken by a bot for merely visiting a webpage, that points to a poorly designed O/S that allows too much to happen with no intervention/permissions. And I'm talking about Windows 7 FWIW.

I agree with you. But no security is perfect no matter the OS. I put high hopes in my chromebook but that comes with caution.

Sure, I get you like Windows 8. But that isn't what the thread is about per se, it's about Windows 7 security, or lack thereof. You are entitled to your opinion as am I. Documentation exists showing that Windows 7 has security issues as the OP provided in the original link. My or your opinion doesn't change facts.

I agree yet again.

I think however that many of the security issues can be circumvented with restraint and education. I have no security issues pretty much ever in Windows. I do realize that may not be possible for everyone, it is however my use case.

 

[corbintechboy]

Okay okay okay! I'll chime in here.

As an IT Professional - wait, let me stop right there. What is a "professional?" Well, I am an End User Support Technician for a company of about 800 end users. I'm the first step in troubleshooting, which mainly deals with the end user's experience. We are in a Microsoft Environment, Windows 7/Server 2012/Active Directory, etc. I've done this as a career for 8 years, mostly in the MS World. I've tinkered around with Apple and Linux. I always put my hands on every new OS that comes out, usually in a Virtual Machine so that I can get myself familiar with them. To sum it up, I've been around the block a little while in the IT world.

Okay, so back to what I was saying... As an IT Professional, I can say with certainly, that any computer OS or program that was written by a human is not ever 100% reliable, secure, or perfect. None of them. Operating Systems (and programs) are written by people. Those people have deadlines, children, money problems, and managers. Those managers have deadlines, families, meetings, and managers. Those managers have meetings, vacations, conference calls, deadlines, and managers. See where I'm going here? People write the 1's and 0's that make things work, and people don't always get it right. Sometimes things break. Any Windows, or Mac, or Linux, user that says "I never have any problems with my OS" are lying. They're either lying to you or to themselves. We've all had to reboot because of an error, or install an update or patch, or remove an update, or stare at our computer and scream "WHY?!?!?". All of us. Windows, Mac, and Linux. All of us.

The person above that mentioned market share is dead on correct. Microsoft is a target for malware and security vulnerabilities because it is the most popular platform being used. Any Mac or Linux user that touts the "untouchable security" of their OS, or swears that their OS can't be infected with malware is either uneducated, delusional, or a FanBoy. Mac and Linux are just as susceptible to bad things, it just doesn't happen very often because the bad guys (malware programmers) don't want to waste their time on trying to access the systems with the smallest market share. They want the big fish, the servers and end users with the most potential targets... Microsoft.

Do I like Windows 8? No, I don't like the Metro thing. But that's okay, I love Windows 7 and it's supported until 2020, so I'm in no rush to upgrade. What if you like Windows 8? That's awesome. What if you're a Mac fan? (Well, you're spending too much money on computers), but hey, use what works for you. Linux people? Keep doing your thing, one day Linux will cross that 1% of the desktop market share. Just keep thinking "I think I can!" No matter what OS you use, it's okay, this is why we have choices! Pick what works for you and go with it.

Now, let's talk about antivirus programs. Antivirus software is like birth control. There's not a single AV program that is 100% effective all the time. The only way to be 100% effective is to never turn on the computer, er well, plug it into the internet. Just like a woman can't get pregnant if she doesn't have intercourse, a computer can't get infected if it's not powered on. But, just like a college girl that's had one too many drinks, once that PC is on the internet, it's at risk.

Some AV programs are better than others, but none of them will stop everything. This is where it falls on the responsibility of the end user. As an IT Professional, I can tell you that more times than not, the person at the keyboard is at fault for getting malware. "But, I only clicked on the webpage that said I could get a free vacation!" Or, "Well, no, I didn't know who that email was from but it sounded important. I mean, I really thought I had inherited a bunch of money from someone in Zimbabwe." As the company IT Guy I've heard it all. All it takes is some common sense to avoid most of the malware out there.


My personal recommendation is this:
1) Don't use an admin account for daily activities such as web browsing.
2) Be smart. Don't click on things that are too good to be true.
3) Choose a good AV program. What's good? Well, it varies. Take the time to do some research and read reviews. I've always good good success with Kaspersky Labs.
4) Realize that no matter what OS you're using, you're not as secure as you think you are.
5) Always view at least one cute kitten photo a day on the internet. Why? It will help relieve some of the stress that comes from realizing that your computer isn't as secure as you think it is.

Great post and your 100% correct in all your points. +1

 

[iMONITOR]

Let's try to get the tread back on topic. That is, how Microsoft Security Essentials, compares with other anti-virus products, in protecting Windows 7.

I'd be interested in hearing from users of various anti-virus products, and what your experience has been.

 

[QDP2012]

Let's try to get the tread back on topic. That is, how Microsoft Security Essentials, compares with other anti-virus products, in protecting Windows 7.

I'd be interested in hearing from users of various anti-virus products, and what your experience has been.

I know of a situation, from several years ago, where a Windows 7 Pro PC with McAfee Internet Security Suite (ISS) got infected with a rootkit. McAfee ISS never detected it, and thus couldn't fix the problem. Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) detected it, but had no way to remove it. Internet research at the time indicated that only two industrially-recognized tools would remove it -- Norton 360 (N360) and a brand-new AV product that was newly on the market that year (the product was supposedly a from-scratch ground-up build by one person).

So, McAfee was uninstalled. Norton 360 was installed. N360 detected the virus, but could not effectively remove it, and recommended/required Norton Power Eraser as the next step. NPE detected it, but after several failed-attempts, only removed "half" of it. MSE still detected the remaining "half", but could not remove it. The user's situational requirements prevented a complete rebuild of the computer, so the user continued with the "second-half" of the rootkit lingering around. Much later, the above security products (having been updated regularly) still could not remove the remaining "half". Only MalwareBytes' AntiMalware properly detected it, recognized it correctly, fully quarantined, and removed it.

The "top-ten" security-suite reviews published in professional magazines at the time that N360 was installed, made a point of clarifying how anti-virus products of the (then) past were considered sufficient if they handled 95% of the threats, and were considered great if they handled 99%, but that by the time the article was written, the computer industry was under enough of a threat from viruses, etc. that to be in their top-ten product-list, the product must handle 99.995%, but they noted that the top products actually handled 99.9999% of the threats. N360 and the other unnamed custom-built product were the top two that month. McAfee was approximately 14th in their survey, at that time, with a rating of something like 99.9986%.


On a personal note, after decades of "singing the praises" of certain AV security products (both consumer and professional-business grade), and finding that no single product is the miracle-cure-all, I long ago quit playing favorites, and now use the one that works for the given situation. If a user has a favorite, one which they find easiest to use, then I will help them install and configure it, so long as the product actually does the job well enough. If it is insufficient, then I'll recommend something else as part of their security strategy. Generally, I do not recommend MSE, because it seems not to be in that 99.9999% protection bracket. If a user prefers MSE, I will help configure it, but will recommend something else, while doing so.

Hope this helps,

 

[coolderb]

Let's try to get the tread back on topic. That is, how Microsoft Security Essentials, compares with other anti-virus products, in protecting Windows 7.

I'd be interested in hearing from users of various anti-virus products, and what your experience has been.

I hate when I get calls from folks who bought a new computer a few months ago that came with a 3 or 6 month trial version antivirus program but failed to pay for the update or ignored it. They contract a virus and then expect me to somehow magically remove it. The only way to completely remove it at that point is to reformat the drive and re-install Windows.

I wish computer vendors would stop including trial versions of antivirus products. It only leads to problems. Pay an extra couple of dollars and include a full license.

 

[CapStar362]

i found BitDefender Total Security as my new home....

 

[iMONITOR]

i found BitDefender Total Security as my new home....

I'm not familiar with them. I checked their website, and they don't even give an address, or phone number. What country are they based in?

 

[QDP2012]

I'm not familiar with them...What country are they based in?

Wikipedia: Bitdefender -- indicates company is based in Romania.

 

[krd400]

I'm not familiar with them. I checked their website, and they don't even give an address, or phone number. What country are they based in?

Bit Defender is produced by a company named Softwin located in Bucharest, Romanian. I believe they had a free version of their anti-virus software when I checked them out about 2 months ago but I can't seem to find a free version anymore. I have windows 7, SP-1, 64 bit and use MSE along with the free version of Malwarebytes and all seems to be fine.

 

[QDP2012]

...I believe they had a free version of their anti-virus software when I checked them out about 2 months ago but I can't seem to find a free version anymore....

• Their main website promotes a 30-day free trial of their paid products.
  
  
• Separate from that, a quick Google search listed this:
  
  Free Antivirus Software - Download Bitdefender Antivirus Free
  
  Not sure if that is what you seek.

Hope it helps,

 

[krd400]

Yes.....thanks. I believe that is the free version I saw earlier. I don't plan on changing what I'm using now but a friend of mine is looking for a good free anti-virus. I'll keep the link for future reference.

 

[CapStar362]

the TS version is a blast! incorporates Anti-Theft even. just for giggles i even added BitDefender on my phone and it has the Theft options also. i tested that in my room once with a friend sleeping just outside... i activate the "Scream" feature............ GOOD GOD HOLY BEJEBUS BATMAN!!!


phone starts screaming as loud as it could possibily get:


IM STOLEN!! IM STOLEN!!!IM STOLEN!! IM STOLEN!!!IM STOLEN!! IM STOLEN!!!IM STOLEN!! IM STOLEN!!!

among other featues, BD has a "Secure Wallet" Cloud based "Secure Repository" MS outlook Anti-Phishing filters, Anti-Theft which comprises of the following features:

Stealth Audio-Video ( video if capable ) recording of suspect.
Geo Locating
Remote Lockdown
Remote Encrypting
Remote DOD Scale HDD Wiping


its nice. and its ALL included in BitDefender Total Security

 

[SCPD]

I took a computer running NORTON removed NORTON full version all the way and installed AVG FREE it found 145 viruses no not cookies ,and I am serious it sped up the computer 95 percent.The list seems inaccurate.Security essentials has never done anything for me,never picked up anything ever.

 

[CapStar362]

norton is a joke. biggest mem hog, largest waste of disk access and storage control. ... tons of extra folders everywhere in the local tree. .... i remember the days of Peter Norton.... perfect software. not all that bloated crap.

 

[W2IBC]

what is this micro$oft stuff you speak of...

 

[WB4CS]

what is this micro$oft stuff you speak of...

The company that makes the operating system that people who live in the real world use.

 

[flythunderbird]

Let's try to get the tread back on topic. That is, how Microsoft Security Essentials, compares with other anti-virus products, in protecting Windows 7.

I'd be interested in hearing from users of various anti-virus products, and what your experience has been.

Well, here's my experience.

At work, we used to use Symantec/Norton, but it was switched to McAfee. The reason for the switch was - literally - "just because." Symantec was working great, but there was a change in the leadership of the IT security area and the new leader wanted to do things "his way" ... so out goes Symantec and in comes McAfee at a high monetary cost, with no discernible benefits over Symantec. McAfee has generally been OK, but we have had some small problems.

At home, I run Avast on five PCs and have never had a problem with it.

When my neighbors have problems with their antivirus programs, more often than not they are running AVG. I replace it with Avast and their problems seem to go away.

My 15 years of experience in IT has taught me that there is no "silver bullet" when it comes to anti-virus products. More and more, it seems that arguing over anti-virus products is like arguing over Ford vs. Chevy. Use what works best for you and your situation ...

 

[iMONITOR]

I hate when I get calls from folks who bought a new computer a few months ago that came with a 3 or 6 month trial version antivirus program but failed to pay for the update or ignored it. They contract a virus and then expect me to somehow magically remove it. The only way to completely remove it at that point is to reformat the drive and re-install Windows.

I wish computer vendors would stop including trial versions of antivirus products. It only leads to problems. Pay an extra couple of dollars and include a full license.

+1 Excellent point!

 

[iMONITOR]

I replace it with Avast and their problems seem to go away.

My 15 years of experience in IT has taught me that there is no "silver bullet" when it comes to anti-virus products. More and more, it seems that arguing over anti-virus products is like arguing over Ford vs. Chevy. Use what works best for you and your situation ...

Exactly! Some swear by them, others swear at them!

Avast was working pretty good for me. As I said, I was turned off my the vendor (not Avast apparently), trying to automatically renew my annual subscription with out my approval. The only other thing I found was it hit a few false positives, one actually being a Microsoft Windows Update. Who knows, maybe it was looking out for me! LOL!

MSE, while I used it, seemed ok, but I always had to use a secondary app, like Malware Bytes, for total protection.

So far, the Norton Security Suite, offered for free from Comcast, is doing the job! It's a full, complete version, like you'd buy at retail. So well see how it goes.

It's interesting to note, the Mac, and Linux community is not as immune as they used to be. I don't hate on Mac, and I run Linux in addition to Windows.