Avast Free Antivirus 2017 VS Windows Defender - Windows 10

[brambedkar59]

Behaviour Shield: can be activated and customized through gpedit under:

Good to know, wonder why MS has disabled this by default.

Web Shield: Introducion Windows Defender Application Guard:


Windows Defender Application Guard (gpedit.msc - Computer configuration - Administrative templates - Windows components - Windows Defender Application Guard):

Requirements: At least Win10 Enterprise.

Customizable:

MpEngine:

• Enable all settings

Windows Defender SmartScreen:

• Enable for both - Edge and Explorer

Set-MpPreference -PUAProtection 1 for PUP protection

------------------------

Bad Signature: Say hello to Windows Defender MAPS, on the cloud protection

MAPS:

• Block at first sight - enable
• MAPS - enable (advanced MAPS)
• Send file samples - enable (all samples)

------------------------

It's not Windows Defender sucks. It's users expect the perfect software to help them happy click the world.

They should had just added all these settings to an advanced menu in defender, which could be activated only through GPEDIT. It would make life much easier for some of us.

 

[viel]

I will admit that Avast protection is a little better, but you can't beat Windows Defender's smooth compatibility with apps and Windows updates.
Any 3rd party AV that you install carries with it a calculated risk of issues, and if not now, then later on.
WD+NVT ERP = great protection and zero issues.

How about Avast + WD (periodic scanning) + Malwarebytes + Hitman Pro + Windows firewall?

 

[Syafiq]

I would choose avast, It's lighter than WD

 

[Daniel Keller]

WD here. But only with hardened windows 10...

 

[Nevi]

WD has actually improved alot the last year or so in the tests I have seen.But I guess if I should use one of those two i would use Avast. It have had a good reputation a long time, and are very light on resources. At least until I have seen more convincing tests from WD. Every time.

 

[jamescv7]

Honestly the answer from this thread can be found anywhere here in MT.

So its already obvious which you are gaining in, many users are aware on the features of Avast and WD too.

At the end of the day, features are matters if it contributes well on the traditional detection mechanism.

 

[DeepWeb]

Windows Defender in its default settings is a nothing but a placebo. Most of Windows 10's protection comes through Windows Update plugging vulnerabilities and everyone gets that. Even a free 3rd party antivirus is still better than Windows Defender.

Edit: That being said if you can tweak Windows Defender in Group Policy, you are so much better off.

 

[viel]

A

WD has actually improved alot the last year or so in the tests I have seen.But I guess if I should use one of those two i would use Avast. It have had a good reputation a long time, and are very light on resources. At least until I have seen more convincing tests from WD. Every time.

What if you have periodic scanning on :O

 

[Nevi]

It would not change my mind whether some other settings were used.

 

[mekelek]

i don't understand why some people think of security suites like football clubs, are you here to cheer for them and get infected meanwhile or use them to protect you?
"WD is improving", great, when it's actually not a pile of ... , maybe it will be worth using.

to OP, 80% of all the AVs you put in comparison with WD, you will always get the AV picked by most people, WD has weak/late signatures and PUP detection, and that's it.

 

[DeepWeb]

Just tried Avast. Just like the others, it has annoying hooks that will break some programs, especially games and gaming platforms. By doing so they create more problems than they solve. I'm puzzled by security companies that prefer to break things. Just stop and follow Microsoft's guidelines on how to make a good antivirus.

Until then, just use Windows Defender and maybe Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit and a portable 2nd opinion scanner like Zemana that won't bother you.

 

[mekelek]

Just tried Avast. Just like the others, it has annoying hooks that will break some programs, especially games and gaming platforms. By doing so they create more problems than they solve. I'm puzzled by security companies that prefer to break things. Just stop and follow Microsoft's guidelines on how to make a good antivirus.

Until then, just use Windows Defender and maybe Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit and a portable 2nd opinion scanner like Zemana that won't bother you.

MBAE uses hooks, Zemana uses hooks, wait for it, WD uses hooks.
you're blaming hooks for "breaking some programs" when in reality it is something EVERY single security related software uses.
also please tell us which program Avast broke and how, I'm actually interested now.

 

[Glashouse]

i don't understand why some people think of security suites like football clubs, are you here to cheer for them and get infected meanwhile or use them to protect you?

perfect saying, nothing to add!

 

[212eta]

avast due to

• Web & Behavior Shields
• Low performance Impact
• Better Protection

 

[DeepWeb]

MBAE uses hooks, Zemana uses hooks, wait for it, WD uses hooks.
you're blaming hooks for "breaking some programs" when in reality it is something EVERY single security related software uses.
also please tell us which program Avast broke and how, I'm actually interested now.

The portable version of Zemana may use hooks and then you can close the program. MBAE and others use them in the right place. It is mostly mainstream antivirus companies that use them in the wrong place which is well reported by MANY developers:
Google Chrome engineer says Windows Defender “the only well behaved AV” | On MSFT

That being said, I tried F-Secure, Bitdefender, Avast, they all won't allow Microsoft Office to do automatic updates, won't allow to check for device driver updates and the EA Origin Client to log on. When I looked at the logs of Origin, it said that the SSL cipher was broken. Might not be any hooks and just the fact that they mess with SSL/TLS. Either way, in all cases, the issues vanished in a puff of smoke when I uninstalled them and simply used WD. Whatever those 3 have in common, it's ugly and causes more problems than it is worth it and it reeks of self-importance that they break security mechanisms to inject their own security mechanisms.

 

[mekelek]

The portable version of Zemana may use hooks and then you can close the program. MBAE and others use them in the right place. It is mostly mainstream antivirus companies that use them in the wrong place which is well reported by MANY developers:
Google Chrome engineer says Windows Defender “the only well behaved AV” | On MSFT

That being said, I tried F-Secure, Bitdefender, Avast, they all won't allow Microsoft Office to do automatic updates, won't allow to check for device driver updates and the EA Origin Client to log on. When I looked at the logs of Origin, it said that the SSL cipher was broken. Might not be any hooks and just the fact that they mess with SSL/TLS. Either way, in all cases, the issues vanished in a puff of smoke when I uninstalled them and simply used WD. Whatever those 3 have in common, it's ugly and causes more problems than it is worth it and it reeks of self-importance that they break security mechanisms to inject their own security mechanisms.

all these you mentioned aren't happening because of AV but because your windows is in a state where you should consider reinstalling.
I do all these you mentioned, everything goes smooth, my laptop is running F-Secure and had BD for a while without issues.
You're blaming the nonexistent problem on AV suite.

 

[viel]

all these you mentioned aren't happening cause of AV but because you're windows is in a state where you should consider reinstalling.
I do all these you mentioned, everything goes smooth, my laptop is running FSecure and had BD for a while without issues.
you're blaming the nonexistent problem on AV suite.

One more question, I am now an Avast user, I also just saw a updated test. Avira had 35 files left over and Avast had a number of files in the 50s left over,
Why is everyone telling me to use Avast over Avira?
Thanks.

 

[mekelek]

One more question, I am now an Avast user, I also just saw a updated test. Avira had 35 files left over and Avast had a number of files in the 50s left over,
Why is everyone telling me to use Avast over Avira?
Thanks.

cause Avira's only protection lies in signatures, so it will always find more malware statically(manual scan). meanwhile Avast has dynamic modules that detect malware even after they get executed.

 

[viel]

cause Avira's only protection lies in signatures, so it will always find more malware statically(manual scan). meanwhile Avast has dynamic modules that detect malware even after they get executed.

I also use it with WD (Periodic scanning) + Hitman Pro + Malwarebytes

 

[mekelek]

I also use it with WD (Periodic scanning) + Hitman Pro + Malwarebytes

so you don't have any realtime protection or anti-exe or SRP. risky...