Microsoft Security Essentials last in banking trojan detection test

[akuigla]

I had MSE for about a month.
Then I scanned with MBAM. It found two dozen different trojans,pup-s and other infiltrators.I was surprised till I've read this:

http://www.howtogeek.com/173291/goo...w-recommends-you-use-a-third-party-antivirus/

Uninstalled MSE.
Installed Qihoo total Security.
Since then no more problems.

 

[Ink]

MSE/WD is a good Antivirus, but not the best. I agree with @cruelsister about people "assuming" MSE/WD is a top product. It's only as good as the user allows.

 

[Spokane9]

surprised

 

[midzan21]

Actually I'm not suprised that MSE/WD have that low score. On my last PC which I got to cleanup (reguallary cleanup from old Windows 7 SP1 installation back in 2010 on cousins PC) I found only 2 trojans which MSE skipped (MBAM found it).
Otherwise this AV is fine for somebody who use more brain.exe than AV and other protections when surf online.

 

[FreddyFreeloader]

And how does one get infected with this malware? Usually by a careless, click-happy user opening email attachments, clicking on dodgy links on Facebook, Twitter, etc - you get the picture.

 

[Tony Cole]

FreddyFreeloader very, very true. People just click anything and them boom, the pdf file they thought was from their bank (I received a fake HSBC email today) and their infected. Teach people the basics of IT/malware and what NOT to do. When I started as a junior doctor, the first course I went on was an IT course, 1st to learn about the hospitals systems, then how to deal with rogue files etc., even the NHS get's fake emails, with please click this!

 

[JakeXPMan]

Tough one, interesting AV statistics.

MSE is OK but not great. Would actually recommend it more for the experienced PC user, who uses safer browsing habits and knows what to avoid online or how to remove an infection. If you just zoom websites at random and download a lot, MSE will protect POORLY. Then its time for other AV's or Malwarebytes to come in and save the day or the PC.

I would vote so-so, but it's not an option, can't vote yes... no seems too harsh lol, as it does block and remove some dangerous things with ease.

 

[starchild76]

its the least intrusive av that integrates the best into windows operating system , and that is the only real pluspoint really. I am glad that AVG did descent in the test. althought they still have to work on their product intensively.
here are some direct quotes I have from an AVG official who reveals a bit of future improvements :

"Sandboxing technologies are constantly being evaulated, whilst we don’t have them yet, we may revisit this in the future or other types of virtualization engine.
Regarding better heuristics, our proactive results in the last VB100 test (https://www.virusbtn.com/virusbulletin/archive/2014/12/vb201412-comparative) are pretty good, but I agree there is always room for improvement."

when asked for a second scan engine in AVG this whas the answer :

"Regarding a second scan engine inside AVG, our goal is to invest all available resources into improving our own engine as much as possible.
A number of AV companies are using the Bitdefender engine, but still lag behind Bitdefender themselves in all measured categories (protection, performance, usability).
A second scan scan engine doesn’t necessarily mean better results during independent tests."

 

[Ink]

No matter how MSE scores, they use it as a baseline score, so remember it's not 0%.