Hi i thinking in configure one of my pc whith free programs. I am thinking to use WD or KFA . I think both are good softwares . I am cuestioning me about what of this offer better protection and speed performance. I hope your contributions of objetive compare. Thanks
Kaspersky free vs Windows Defender
- Thread starter Aktiffiso
- Start date
KFA is better, but it gives me problems with Thunderbird, so I prefer Avast (it has BB) and is really good. Other options would be Bitdefender free or Qihoo because they also have BB (Behavior Blocker)
- Jul 28, 2017
- 185
Kaspersky wasn't an option to the poll so I selected other. I can't imagine anyone using windows defender... Ever. It is one of if not the worst there is. All WD offers is signature protection, and its signatures are absolutely usless. You are better off guessing whats malicious or not than trusting WD. Any other free alternative is better.
IMO the best free set up is Sophos Home + Comodo Firewall. Comodo is arguably the best free security solution out there. The only area Comodo fails is in signatures, but thats where Sophos comes in. Sophos has some of the best signatures, so this will make up for Comodo's terrible signatures. Comodo is known for its firewall, auto-sandboxing, and HIPS. IMO every free configuration should have Comodo, assuming it doesn't interfere with anything they are doing.
Conclusion: Sophos Homes + Comodo Firewall is the best free configuration you can have. (At least from what I've seen)
IMO the best free set up is Sophos Home + Comodo Firewall. Comodo is arguably the best free security solution out there. The only area Comodo fails is in signatures, but thats where Sophos comes in. Sophos has some of the best signatures, so this will make up for Comodo's terrible signatures. Comodo is known for its firewall, auto-sandboxing, and HIPS. IMO every free configuration should have Comodo, assuming it doesn't interfere with anything they are doing.
Conclusion: Sophos Homes + Comodo Firewall is the best free configuration you can have. (At least from what I've seen)
Hi i am entered WD has now cloud protection. I decide to compare KFA and WD because they does not have BB because i have a alternative who cover this área, Before i think to include Emsisoft but i think tisis a diferent product because it have BB
KFA Signature and Cloud
WD Signature and Cloud
KFA super signatures and super cloud
WD In theory better every day and core sistema security.
KFA Signature and Cloud
WD Signature and Cloud
KFA super signatures and super cloud
WD In theory better every day and core sistema security.
- May 13, 2017
- 2,486
As for protection, WD might stand a chance against KFA, but as for performance, KFA is the obvious choice then.
MS makes software, which works, as for optimization and polishing, that is something, they do not pay much attention to.
Exactly, in theory. WD features might seem cool, but it is something, that other AVs have had for years. WD is always just catching up.
WD has got "Block at First Sight" since CU and it will get an exploit and somewhat anti-ransomware protection since Fall Update.
To maximize WD's protection, you can use this:
Code:
reg add "HKLM\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows Defender\MpEngine" /v "MpEnablePus" /t REG_DWORD /d "1" /f
reg add "HKLM\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows Defender\SpyNet" /v "DisableBlockAtFirstSeen" /t REG_DWORD /d "0" /f
reg add "HKLM\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows Defender\SpyNet" /v "SpynetReporting" /t REG_DWORD /d "2" /f
reg add "HKLM\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows Defender\SpyNet" /v "SubmitSamplesConsent" /t REG_DWORD /d "3" /fYou always can give an opportunity to SecureAPlus.
- Jul 14, 2015
- 733
Some people should be better informed before they make any statements, i am not a fan of WD but it already has BB for quite some time, read more here :
Windows Defender Antivirus cloud protection service: Advanced real-time defense against never-before-seen malware
I prefer avast or BD free.
Last edited:
- Jul 6, 2017
- 2,392
I would stay with kaspersky free or Avast
Emsisoft + WinPatrol + any cloud AV is, IMO, too much
Emsisoft + VoodooShield is very light and strong, and you don´t need anything else, but if you want, a specific anti ransomware AppCheck is a free and very good option
Emsisoft + VoodooShield is very light and strong, and you don´t need anything else, but if you want, a specific anti ransomware AppCheck is a free and very good option
I think Emsi is a great software WAR is very cool. I think WD has BB but it is paid versión. KFA likes me but i dont know how really are superior tan WD because WD recives info from "Microsfot Windows 10 Spyware" and have too much data to be a better protection software. Sometimes for me is bad because uses too much HDD
- Aug 30, 2015
- 1,928
Either Windows Defender, Kaspersky Free, or Avast Free. I haven't had much experience with Kaspersky so I'd choose between Avast or Windows Defender. 
- Jul 3, 2015
- 8,153
Kaspersky of all kinds and flavors is prone to conflicts with other software. If that doesn't bother you, then it is a better choice than WD.
If you run other security software, WD is the best option, because it will not conflict, and will allow your other security softs to perform at their best.
If you run other security software, WD is the best option, because it will not conflict, and will allow your other security softs to perform at their best.
- May 7, 2016
- 1,287
- May 9, 2015
- 625
WD far from worst. WD in recent times especially after creators update is a pretty good performer and can compete with other free AVs just fine. WD offering only signature protection is also wrong. WD offer behavioral detection, cloud protection, tightly integrated with Win 10 OS offers adequate protection to those who are not careless. One can also enable optional PUP protection in WD through powershell which will help protect the system from fake softwares. Still there are good alternative to WD like Avast, BitDefender which have solid web protection capabilities. Kaspersky Free has one major weakness is its lack of behavioral detection capability which is a must have feature to deal with current day security threat scenario.
- Feb 13, 2017
- 737
The actual differences between KFA and WD aren't that many, considering KFA does not have any type of behaviour blocker, just like WD. This means that both programs rely only on signaturers+cloud, and even though Kaspersky ones are a bit better, I believe it does not make much difference in a real world scenario.
If we were comparing WD to Bitdefender Free (which has a very good behaviour blocker) then the differences would be a bit bigger.
Anyway, please do not forget to pack a default-deny solution aside your AV (Voodooshield, Comodo Firewall, SecureAPlus, etc).
If we were comparing WD to Bitdefender Free (which has a very good behaviour blocker) then the differences would be a bit bigger.
Anyway, please do not forget to pack a default-deny solution aside your AV (Voodooshield, Comodo Firewall, SecureAPlus, etc).
- Jun 24, 2016
- 2,400
In my personal opinion, Kaspersky Free lacks of the modules that make it a great software, those you only have on the paid suite. So i would stand and fight along Windows Defender on this one, since it is less intrusive with software and browser and gives a decent protection level.
- May 11, 2011
- 444
- Oct 23, 2012
- 12,527
Edited Poll.
It would help if you posted your operating system such as Windows 7,8.1,10
It would help if you posted your operating system such as Windows 7,8.1,10
Similar threads
