Is Windows Defender in Windows 8.1 Enough for daily computing and surfing needs?

[Lailson]

Yes, but is ESET good for 0-day malware? PrivateFirewall is great for 0-day right?

Eset use in my notebook, I have nothing to complain about super lightweight and fees of 95% of malware Zero Day only is paid. If you want a free 360is with a very similar detection with eset. Windows Defender takes a long time to detect new malware. Have a look in the category of virus exchange that I participate along with a few colleagues who do tests with detection of av.

 

[ifacedown]

Yes, i know. I have used ESET for months. very light and efficient.

 

[WalterWolf]

Just add sandboxie to windows defender and you're good .You won't get virus if you won't download it

 

[DaZa9]

I just used the Fake AV as an example since it was readily available; a variety of malware target both WD and MSE. The point I tried to make is that WD can be shut down with ease by malware rendering it useless. I hope you agree that this is not a good thing.

Agree, 2 lines of code can disable security center, Windows firewall,WD and MSE.

 

[Venustus]

On windows 8.1, combined with smart screen and windows firewall, windows defender is enough for average surfing needs.. Leave smart screen on, crank UAC to max, and you will be good to go.

Most of us in this forum you see running tanks for protection, is because, we dare to go where no man has gone before on the net, huh Umbra

Agreed!!

 

[illumination]

If you don't mind my butting in, I can give an illustration on one of the main reasons Windows Defender is inadequate - Go to Malware Hub here:

http://malwaretips.com/threads/windows-antibreach-suite.23091/

When one runs this Fake AV with Windows Defender "protecting" the system (aside from letting the malware activate and infect the system), note that the malware will do something that is very common- it will modify the registry to disable Windows Defender (shuts down msascui.exe and suppresses msmpeng.exe). This is a very common thing for malware to do and the ease at which it can be accomplished is just unacceptable.

And saying as long as one surfs safely WD is fine is like saying auto insurance is not necessary if one drives safely. Neither is a very good idea.

I see where you are going with this.. Keep in mind this is on windows 8.1 in question by the OP, so with this in mind, he could run windows defender, with windows firewall, smartscreen enabled, and UAC on max.. Now add to this, dropping Admin rights by running a standard account. Im sure this will circumvent most vulnerabilities.. Of course this goes without saying... It also takes a little common sense to run with them

In the last 4 years, i have not had a infection no matter what i have run on my system, simply from knowing how to get around, how to check links before clicking, and to check downloads before proceeding.

 

[Deleted member 178]

i still don't understand why people doubt about Windows Defender/MSE , it is just a scanner with some proactivity features designed for common users (not geeks malware-seeker/testers) and part of of the whole security architecture of Windows; you cant just compare it with others; i saw people claiming it does nothing but do they use UAC when the malware was executed (most can't even pass UAC)? and how the malware get into the system? does Smartscreen were enabled? and how they got it? surely not by going to safe sites?

what i wanna say is that people just disable/discard all the other features of windows to test MSE...SERIOUSLY?

i can say that almost all AVs will fail against 0-Days if i disable all their proactive components.

you want compare MSE with other solutions? compare it fairly.

Thanks

 

[ifacedown]

i still don't understand why people doubt about Windows Defender/MSE , it is just a scanner with some proactivity features designed for common users (not geeks malware-seeker/testers) and part of of the whole security architecture of Windows; you cant just compare it with others; i saw people claiming it does nothing but do they use UAC when the malware was executed (most can't even pass UAC)? and how the malware get into the system? does Smartscreen were enabled? and how they got it? surely not by going to safe sites?

what i wanna say is that people just disable/discard all the other features of windows to test MSE...SERIOUSLY?

i can say that almost all AVs will fail against 0-Days if i disable all their proactive components.

you want compare MSE with other solutions? compare it fairly.

Thanks

Yes, you are so right. Window's 8.1's built-in security features are enough for the common average user - and also so light. I just notice that sometimes ESET NOD32 is lighter than WD in other terms. For example, opening a folder full of executables for the first time - WD's proactive scanning (I guess) causes some lag. While with ESET, almost none at all.

 

[Deleted member 178]

Yes, you are so right. Window's 8.1's built-in security features are enough for the common average user - and also so light. I just notice that sometimes ESET NOD32 is lighter than WD in other terms. For example, opening a folder full of executables for the first time - WD's proactive scanning (I guess) causes some lag. While with ESET, almost none at all.

yes you guessed right, it is a long time known issue but Microsoft seems not quite ready to deal with it

 

[Shaun]

Totally late entry into this but I am almost in love with windows defender, I use it on its own and no problems. Just don't got to websites like virusesRus* It can also detect and remove cryptolocker which is pretty cool.


* note: this domain is made up by me, please do not go and search it up because you never know what you might find.