Serious Discussion Microsoft Defender in 2024

[Studynxx]

I want to ask folks on here, those of you who are malware hunters ie as a hobby you actively test hundreds or thousands of samples against different AVs: How good has MD become in 2024 compared to, say, Bitdefender or KTS?

I keep paying for KTS because 1) I've had very positive results, 2) I download a lot of stuff very often, 3) Honestly a huge component to this is the "set and forget". I set up KTS via a script, it applies a Master Config file that I have tested multiple times, locks down the AV ie without password you can't make any changes to it etc, everything that KSN can't "read" becomes part of the "High Restricted" category, etc etc. It's just so simple, and I'm not a shill as in I wasn't paid by Kaspersky to say any of this. It's just been my experience.

 

[Bot]

Microsoft Defender has significantly improved over the years and is now considered a strong contender in the antivirus market. However, it may not offer the same level of customization and control as KTS. If you're comfortable with KTS and it suits your needs, there's no pressing need to switch. But if you're interested in testing, you might find Defender's performance satisfactory in 2024.

 

[oldschool]

I'm not sure there are many active malware hunters on the forum now, especially since the Malware Hub is defunct. @SeriousHoax, maybe @RoboMan and a few others. In fact, there isn't a whole lot of general activity on the forum lately. But, @Shadowra has tested it in the past and will be posting another one shortly.

You sound like you're happy with KTS so you may want to stick with it. OTOH, MS Defender's protection is quite good now, generally speaking. If you're talking about targeted attacks, etc., then maybe ....

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

I want to ask folks on here, those of you who are malware hunters ie as a hobby you actively test hundreds or thousands of samples against different AVs: How good has MD become in 2024 compared to, say, Bitdefender or KTS?

I keep paying for KTS because 1) I've had very positive results, 2) I download a lot of stuff very often, 3) Honestly a huge component to this is the "set and forget". I set up KTS via a script, it applies a Master Config file that I have tested multiple times, locks down the AV ie without password you can't make any changes to it etc, everything that KSN can't "read" becomes part of the "High Restricted" category, etc etc. It's just so simple, and I'm not a shill as in I wasn't paid by Kaspersky to say any of this. It's just been my experience.

would love to have a copy of this script (you can send it in dm if not allowed here )

 

[lokamoka820]

I was testing some software last month "as a yearly habit to check if my software list is still fit my needs best or there are better solutions", and I tested Avast, Bitdefender and Kaspersky, and now back to MS Defender again, I can't tell if one is better than other, but I can tell you to arrange your priorities and select your security software depending on that.

For example, I want a light AV that doesn't slow my browsing experience which is MS Defender because it doesn't have web filter at all but I can replace it with light security extension.

But I can tell you what I don't like about every one of them, "my personal opinion":

• Avast is light and awesome for the first week, then I don't know why it lags after.
• Bitdefender is heavy and sluggish all the time.
• Kaspersky give me the slowest web experience, but in everything else it is the best.
• MS Defender have false positive lately which was the reason to try something else.

So if you feel that Kaspersky work better for you continue with it, it is hard to be satisfied with security product, if you found your perfect product just keep using it.

 

[bazang]

I keep paying for KTS because 1) I've had very positive results

Then you are very likely to be disappointed if you do change.

2) I download a lot of stuff very often

Sooner, or later, even KTS will disappoint you. It is just a matter of time with this behavior: "I download a lot of stuff very often."

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

3) Honestly a huge component to this is the "set and forget".

With Windows native security you will have to make tweaks.

Microsoft Defender alone will not be a good replacement of KTS with your cyber hygiene habits.

 

[Harputlu]

Last year I used sophos home premium. I bought a 3 year license because I knew it was lightweight and had good protection. it's a set it and forget it program and I'm very happy with it.

 

[oldschool]

I can't tell if one is better than other, but I can tell you to arrange your priorities and select your security software depending on that.

Definitely, which he's already done going by the OP. Personally, I see no reason to use 3rd party software on Windows.

 

[jackuars]

Definitely, which he's already done going by the OP. Personally, I see no reason to use paid 3rd party software on Windows.

Corrected, for me.

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Last year I used sophos home premium. I bought a 3 year license because I knew it was lightweight and had good protection. it's a set it and forget it program and I'm very happy with it.

I'm using hit man pro alert on a laptop basically most stuff enabled except crypto guard(to reduce performance usage ) and I have disabled exploit mitigations of eset endpoint so there won't be conflicts that may cause decreased performance

 

[bazang]

Personally, I see no reason to use 3rd party software on Windows.

In your use case, with your habits and knowledge, of course.

However, for many they do not know the risks, how to calculate the risks, nor determine what their real security needs are.

Simple is so much better than complex. More effective. More efficient. Easier for the hoomans to cope with and manage.

Because of people, it is so easy to figure out the future of security. It will be 100% automated and run invisibly in the background. Future userlanders will not be involved in security. Ever. They will never have to exert a single brain cell in thinking about it or interacting with it. There will be no notifications. There will be no configuration settings. Plus they will have BMIs > 40.

Will that model ever work? Maybe. Depends upon the how capable the AI utilized is. But my instincts tell me that those future userlanders will do stuff that nullifies that AI-based security, just as users do to today's security. Any model that attempts to provide security while not directly involving the hooman by requiring them to have knowledge and disciplined adherence to certain behaviors will have weaknesses and vulnerabilities.

Security is not software. Security is a process (that involves hoomans). Users are always the problem. Always.

 

[Studynxx]

In your use case, with your habits and knowledge, of course.

However, for many they do not know the risks, how to calculate the risks, nor determine what their real security needs are.

Simple is so much better than complex. More effective. More efficient. Easier for the hoomans to cope with and manage.

Because of people, it is so easy to figure out the future of security. It will be 100% automated and run invisibly in the background. Future userlanders will not be involved in security. Ever. They will never have to exert a single brain cell in thinking about it or interacting with it. There will be no notifications. There will be no configuration settings. Plus they will have BMIs > 40.

Will that model ever work? Maybe. Depends upon the how capable the AI utilized is. But my instincts tell me that those future userlanders will do stuff that nullifies that AI-based security, just as users do to today's security. Any model that attempts to provide security while not directly involving the hooman by requiring them to have knowledge and disciplined adherence to certain behaviors will have weaknesses and vulnerabilities.

Security is not software. Security is a process (that involves hoomans). Users are always the problem. Always.

Ah I remember back in my helpdesk days, I would encounter the PEBKAC error so often

 

[RoboMan]

It's a fact Microsoft Defender is getting better and better over time. To be expected honestly, due to its enormous database and the investment Microsoft does in security.

Nevertheless, I find Kaspersky paid products to be top-notch. Not only System Watcher responds better and more efficiently to new emerging threats, but Application Control cannot be matched by any module Defender offers. A well configured Application Control in Kaspersky is a win-win, always. Default-deny as a way of living.

 

[Studynxx]

It's a fact Microsoft Defender is getting better and better over time. To be expected honestly, due to its enormous database and the investment Microsoft does in security.

Nevertheless, I find Kaspersky paid products to be top-notch. Not only System Watcher responds better and more efficiently to new emerging threats, but Application Control cannot be matched by any module Defender offers. A well configured Application Control in Kaspersky is a win-win, always. Default-deny as a way of living.

Been my experience as well. I've been looking into Microsoft's Device Guard which is a set of features such as Application Guard, but it's just not a match for Kaspersky's AC.