New Update Microsoft Launches Windows Defender Extension for Google Chrome

[mekelek]

Thank you, it's no more by direct search on Chrome Web Store, and I couldn't find it by Google...

thank @Evjl's Rain , he brought it to my attention and provided the url.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Thank you, it's no more by direct search on Chrome Web Store, and I couldn't find it by Google...

It is never searchable via google
I think it only appears for norton's users
we can only access it via a direct link

 

[Evjl's Rain]

thank @Evjl's Rain , he brought it to my attention and provided the url.

the good thing for other users is Norton Safe Search is now having the block, not only safe search anymore
Norton Safe Search = norton safe web + safe search + bloats

 

[CyberTech]

Quick test: 20 links (p/s: collecting links from VT was very time-consuming and difficult )
Virustotal phishing: 5
virustotal malware: 5
vxvault/malc0de: 10

Google Safe Browsing = 16/20 | malware 11, phishing 5
5/5
4/5
7/10

Windows Defender Browser Protection = 11/20 | malware 8, phishing 3
3/5
4/5
4/10

Norton = 15/20 | malware 13, phishing 2
2/5
5/5
8/10

Google+WDBP+Norton = 19/20 | malware 14, phishing 5
5/5
5/5
9/10

Avira Browser Safety = 11/20 | malware 9, phishing 2
2/5
2/5
7/10

Microsoft Edge with Smartscreen = 18/20 | malware 15, phishing 3
3/5
5/5
10/10

Good man, What about Malwarebytes for chrome?

 

[FreddyFreeloader]

Will not work on Chromebooks, says app is corrupted.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Good man, What about Malwarebytes for chrome?

here
Add-on - Malwarebytes for Chrome

 

[Prorootect]

Made quick test for the three above: Norton Safe Web, Malwarebytes, Windows Defender.

It's Norton Safe Web only, that blocked my links (and each time the icon vibrate, if new link!):

wnminer.online/: WNMiner - Free Chrome Extension
phonekiller.com/: PHONE KILLER℠

-so I will stick with Norton add-on/extension for now.


...but none blocked:
< Oh #####,
you 404'd! />
on rayanthony.io/extensions/index.html: Ray Anthony Extensions Featuring 'XFrame Assassin' and the 'IE Sucks Bar'
- so maybe it's safe this cool moving rayanthony.io 404 error page

 

[Dirk41]

Hi everyone!
I installed it but then I uninstalled it. I think ublock origin with third party filters/opendns/google safe browsing/sandboxie/ some custom browser settings (even if my main browser is FF)/ common sense are enough in my case.

Today I tested quickly about 10 -20 phishing websites from phishtank and just 2 weren't blocke by google safe browsing. I did not tested MS new extension

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Hi everyone!
I installed it but then I uninstalled it. I think ublock origin with third party filters/opendns/google safe browsing/sandboxie/ some custom browser settings (even if my main browser is FF)/ common sense are enough in my case.

Today I tested quickly about 10 -20 phishing websites from phishtank and just 2 weren't blocke by google safe browsing. I did not tested MS new extension

when I tested with phishtank, I saw GBS missed a lot
but our main concern is malwares because phishings usually don't infiltrate our PC, just created to steal our info when we aren't aware of

This extension is quite good, it's worth adding
it doesn't slowdown your internet speed, unlike avira browser safety

 

[Dirk41]

when I tested with phishtank, I saw GBS missed a lot
but our main concern is malwares because phishings usually don't infiltrate our PC, just created to steal our info when we aren't aware of

This extension is quite good, it's worth adding
it doesn't slowdown your internet speed, unlike avira browser safety

Actually I tested GSB while using FF, but I tought FF use the same GSB of chrome, if not, sorry my apologies. Anyway there are we entries every hour on phishtank, maybe I was lucky picking up. But just look at those urls, just pay attention and you never would log in.

(Now I am seeing that safari, on ios ,don't block any of latest samples)

EDIT: sorry guys, I didn't remember well, this morning I took most of the samples on illegalfawn twitter account, sorry!
But they should be good samples too

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Actually I tested GSB while using FF, but I tought FF use the same GSB of chrome, if not, sorry my apologies. Anyway there are we entries every hour on phishtank, maybe I was lucky picking up. But just look at those urls, just pay attention and you never would log in.

(Now I am seeing that safari, on ios ,don't block any of latest samples)

EDIT: sorry guys, I didn't remember well, this morning I took most of the samples on illegalfawn twitter account, sorry!
But they should be good samples too

firefox does use google safe browsing but for some reasons, it doesn't block as many as GBS. It has a delayed database and sometimes completely misses some links regardless how old the links are while GBS simply blocks them
weird
not sure if firefox has some extra database for phishing

 

[Barakah]

A good move from Microsoft. I think it would be good if one day WD becomes as strong as other big names so that we can drop other products. I don’t use Chrome so I can’t try the extension. Maybe some time later. Thanks for sharing

 

[Prorootect]

Better be safe than sorry. Birds of a feather flock together.

So I use this Windows Defender extension alongside Norton Safe Web and Browser JSGuard.

My extensions population exceeds anything I've ever imagined.

 

[Windows_Security]

Well at the privacy cost of supplying Microsoft with telemetry data (and who knows what more, since the extension has no pricacy policy of its own)), I threw some odd links from VX-Vault, Kernelmode (all with exe's) and it blocked them all, while CPU spikes is between 1,6%-3,1% in Chrome Task Manager (for reference Avira's browser safety spikes between 12% and 37%) on my old Pentium G3240 desktop.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Well at the privacy cost of supplying Microsoft with telemetry data (and who knows what more, since the extension has no pricacy policy of its own)), I threw some odd links from VX-Vault, Kernelmode (all with exe's) and it blocked them all, while CPU spikes is between 1,6%-3,1% in Chrome Task Manager (for reference Avira's browser safety spikes between 12% and 37%) on my old Pentium 3240 desktop.

it's true WDBP does consumes very little resource
while avira browser safety consumes a lot more
Bitdefender even consumes more than avira
norton is as low as WDBP

avira monitors every single package so it can block malicious scripts and prevents attacks in realtime so it consumes much more resource. I wish they provide an option to disable this feature to lower the resource usage
while almost all other extensions just scan a website 1 time only when the site is loading and finishes

chrome's task manager always reports much higher CPU usage than normal compared to windows task manager. In fact, I saw an extension used 120% of CPU while it actually used about 20% in windows task manager

 

[Windows_Security]

@Evjl's Rain

With Bitdefender you mean TrafficLight extension?. I noticed that they have updated the User Interface. It is now possible to disable the tracker numbers on the icon.

MalwareBytes and Avast Online Security extensions also use very little CPU on my Desktop. I have Avast on my wife's PC but to be honest I have never seen catch anything. Because Avast does well and never interferes with website functionality I keep it on my wife's Windows 10 2-in-1.

Peter 2150 was always very positive about Malware Bytes (HpHos) blocklist offered through paid version of MBAM, so would be nice when you could include MBAM and WD in your quick malware URL tests.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

@Evjl's Rain

With Bitdefender you mean TrafficLight extension?. I noticed that they have updated the User Interface. It is now possible to disable the tracker numbers on the icon.

MalwareBytes and Avast Online Security extensions also use very little CPU on my Desktop. I have Avast on my wife's PC but to be honest I have never seen catch anything. Because Avast does well and never interferes with website functionality I keep it on my wife's Windows 10 2-in-1.

Peter 2150 was always very positive about Malware Bytes (HpHos) blocklist offered through paid version of Malwarebytes Anti-Malware, so would be nice when you could include Malwarebytes Anti-Malware and WD in your quick malware URL tests.

yes, I did perform a test of MB extension. It did well
Add-on - Malwarebytes for Chrome

MB even performs better than hphosts+hphosts partial combined. It blocked some websites that are not in the blacklist of hphosts as I checked so it's definitely better
it also warns users about clickbait websites
Latest UK and World News, Sport and Comment | Express.co.uk

avast only has phishing filter and tracking blocker, reputation checker. Not sure if it can warn against malicious website other than phishing or not

BD trafficlight always disappoints me because it almost never blocks any malicious exe download and it causes high CPU usage while checking the website reputation

 

[Ink]

while avira browser safety consumes a lot more

Does having additional extension features boost consumption usage?
Avira Browser Safety - Free security add-on with anti tracking

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Does having additional extension features boost consumption usage?
Avira Browser Safety - Free security add-on with anti tracking

I don't think so because I always disable all of them
it scans our network traffic continously like web filter of an AV so it consumes more CPU
playing a youtube video, avira uses CPU all the time while all other extensions just scans youtube.com = safe => done, no more scan

 

[Azure]

After a quick test on the smartscreen demo page. This extension is not compatible with Adguard for Windows.

With Adguard enabled, no pages were blocked.
With Adguard disabled, the malware and phishing link were blocked.