I wouldn't call it a targeted anti virus as much as it comes default with the operating system and many windows users would be using it. Creating malware to try and bypass windows security as whole, yes this certainly happens. Although attention needs redirected to the method or route, if you will, which is initiated most of the time by social engineering. A good deal of today's problems rely heavily on poor habits and the uninformed. Even above in the example I posted asking Gemini, it is stated "if you surf HIGH RISK websites, or go to platforms that are targeted like gaming, you may want to consider something more then default security. This again is on the user and their habits. Of course this applies to any security you use, as it will mostly likely fail if you think it will save you from yourself and you act invincible with it.
Hardened mode being one , i think web protection email protection , and a few more things like ransomware protection , cybercapture and more ( talking about the Avast "FREE" version not the "one" Version
malwaretips.com
Are you serious right now. You are comparing actual malware analysis to Microsofts Defender application in Windows? Actual Malware Analysis can take weeks for any analyst to do. Please look up the difference.Hardened mode being one , i think web protection email protection , and a few more things like ransomware protection , cybercapture and more ( talking about the Avast "FREE" version not the "one" Version
You can upload your samples at the provided link and test for yourself; the best real-world example is you. Technically, this tool is rated "Malicious" because, after direct user input (meaning the user chooses to use certain features), it could deactivate certain features. There is no malicious behavior, no virus, rootkit, ransomware, nothing, not even adware. At most, you could categorize this as "potentially unwanted program" in Microsoft's interest (for removing data gathering features, etc.), but that's about it. It's not just a "General" or "Heuristic" false positive; it's incorrectly labeled as a Trojan, which is completely inaccurate. They also took about two weeks to provide this answer. Similar sample uploads also take a while. But don't take my word for it; try it yourself.Submit a file for malware analysis - Microsoft Security Intelligence
Submit suspected malware or incorrectly detected files for analysis. Submitted files will be added to or removed from antimalware definitions based on the analysis results.www.microsoft.com
Hot Take - Windows Defender and their "Biased" detections.
So , i tested in a VM this tool W10Privacy - Privacy made easy its known , safe ( as for its no malware but please be aware you COULD break stuff ) Windows defender recognized this as Malware ( not as pup or anything straight malware ) so i uploaded this to WD as false positive after roughly 1...
Microsoft not only misclassified a piece of software, but they also reinforced a false positive by attributing "features" (such as being a Trojan) to it. This was done slowly, and one could even argue, rather dramatically, that now any software that enables a user to perform certain "actions" could be labeled a Trojan according to Microsoft's rating system. This could apply to any program, whether it's CCleaner, most programming tools, or others, as they could all potentially perform similar functions with ease.
their Description of a Trojan
- Trojan: A type of malware that attempts to appear harmless. Unlike a virus or a worm, a trojan doesn't spread by itself. Instead, it tries to look legitimate to tricks users into downloading and installing it. Once installed, trojans perform various malicious activities such as stealing personal information, downloading other malware, or giving attackers access to your device."
Source How Microsoft identifies malware and potentially unwanted applications - Microsoft Defender XDR
I'm not suggesting that Microsoft Defender is inadequate; it's actually a pretty good antivirus. However, I'm dissatisfied with the time they take to process samples and their incorrect categorization of certain software/samples.
Report False Negative
In this instance, Avast is significantly ahead of the curve. Typically, when you submit a sample through their website at the provided link, you receive a response via email (not allways) either the same day or within one day, informing you whether the false positive or unidentified malicious file has been whitelisted or detected.
Iam not , i just said that uploading samples to Microsoft for defender takes weeks for a Verdict , and this verdict even can come out false.
Microsoft ahead of the curve with a couple weeks.
For me, it's the strangest concept to vote for a security product.
Not necessarily as I for one would like to see the return of nice thick progress bar when scanning as opposed to the swirly, crumbly graphic effect so much favoured these days.For me, it's the strangest concept to vote for a security product.
Eset and Kaspersky have the most accurate signatures from all av software I have seen and they allow piracy to be flagged clean(Kaspersky ), fine (eset)Hardened mode being one , i think web protection email protection , and a few more things like ransomware protection , cybercapture and more ( talking about the Avast "FREE" version not the "one" Version
You can upload your samples at the provided link and test for yourself; the best real-world example is you. Technically, this tool is rated "Malicious" because, after direct user input (meaning the user chooses to use certain features), it could deactivate certain features. There is no malicious behavior, no virus, rootkit, ransomware, nothing, not even adware. At most, you could categorize this as "potentially unwanted program" in Microsoft's interest (for removing data gathering features, etc.), but that's about it. It's not just a "General" or "Heuristic" false positive; it's incorrectly labeled as a Trojan, which is completely inaccurate. They also took about two weeks to provide this answer. Similar sample uploads also take a while. But don't take my word for it; try it yourself.Submit a file for malware analysis - Microsoft Security Intelligence
Submit suspected malware or incorrectly detected files for analysis. Submitted files will be added to or removed from antimalware definitions based on the analysis results.www.microsoft.com
Hot Take - Windows Defender and their "Biased" detections.
So , i tested in a VM this tool W10Privacy - Privacy made easy its known , safe ( as for its no malware but please be aware you COULD break stuff ) Windows defender recognized this as Malware ( not as pup or anything straight malware ) so i uploaded this to WD as false positive after roughly 1...
Microsoft not only misclassified a piece of software, but they also reinforced a false positive by attributing "features" (such as being a Trojan) to it. This was done slowly, and one could even argue, rather dramatically, that now any software that enables a user to perform certain "actions" could be labeled a Trojan according to Microsoft's rating system. This could apply to any program, whether it's CCleaner, most programming tools, or others, as they could all potentially perform similar functions with ease.
their Description of a Trojan
- Trojan: A type of malware that attempts to appear harmless. Unlike a virus or a worm, a trojan doesn't spread by itself. Instead, it tries to look legitimate to tricks users into downloading and installing it. Once installed, trojans perform various malicious activities such as stealing personal information, downloading other malware, or giving attackers access to your device."
Source How Microsoft identifies malware and potentially unwanted applications - Microsoft Defender XDR
I'm not suggesting that Microsoft Defender is inadequate; it's actually a pretty good antivirus. However, I'm dissatisfied with the time they take to process samples and their incorrect categorization of certain software/samples.
Report False Negative
In this instance, Avast is significantly ahead of the curve. Typically, when you submit a sample through their website at the provided link, you receive a response via email (not allways) either the same day or within one day, informing you whether the false positive or unidentified malicious file has been whitelisted or detected.
