Microsoft's play with Windows Defender: What are they aiming for?

[RoboMan]

Back to Windows XP, Microsoft would warn you that Security Essentials was not worth it and would even list you some AV companies so you could install a proper antivirus software. Through Windows versions, they kept improving their built-in security software, and it had become a brand new program, which we now refer to as Windows Defender. As they kept updating it, we saw a greater antivirus each time, to the point where you now can rely on it as your primary solution for a daily basis. Microsoft no longer recommends other suites to protect your system.

From a basic security to a recommended software being updated and improved by specialists, acquring new technologies to make it even better.

What do you think Microsoft's play is here? Are they trying to banish AV industry and create the perfect protection so users do not have to rely on third parties? If so, why would they care so much? Are they planning to turn it into a paid software in the future? Pretty much every AV that offers a free version, is backed up by a paid version or ads to get some cash incomes.

Why would a software developer try so hard to offer a free product? What are we missing? Delight us with your answer and thoughts.

 

[ForgottenSeer 19494]

Back to Windows XP, Microsoft would warn you that Security Essentials was not worth it and would even list you some AV companies so you could install a proper antivirus software. Through Windows versions, they kept improving their built-in security software, and it had become a brand new program, which we now refer to as Windows Defender. As they kept updating it, we saw a greater antivirus each time, to the point where you now can rely on it as your primary solution for a daily basis. Microsoft no longer recommends other suites to protect your system.

From a basic security to a recommended software being updated and improved by specialists, acquring new technologies to make it even better.

What do you think Microsoft's play is here? Are they trying to banish AV industry and create the perfect protection so users do not have to rely on third parties? If so, why would they care so much? Are they planning to turn it into a paid software in the future? Pretty much every AV that offers a free version, is backed up by a paid version or ads to get some cash incomes.

Why would a software developer try so hard to offer a free product? What are we missing? Delight us with your answer and thoughts.

Because of Windows 10. They want to make it as secure as possible and tell people to use it. They are removing EMET and building it into the OS, and Windows 10 is built with Agile cycle. They are just trying to improve it. Not trying to ditch up 3rd party vendors, but they want to make it secure. One day when Windows 10 is the only Windows available, it would just become Windows with versions. Like Windows version 1503, version 1607 and version 1703. People might ask you questions as "what version is your Windows". Maybe Windows Defender would not be needed once there are only UWP apps from the store with no desktop apps, but this is a very very long way and there is so much work to do.

 

[Ink]

• Push the boundaries for Windows 10 and developers.
• Defender is now the baseline for all security products in testing lab reports.
  
• Windows Defender Antivirus is an integral component of Windows 10 Home and Enterprise (ATP).

Microsoft will keep Windows Defender. Period.

 

[SHvFl]

Back to Windows XP, Microsoft would warn you that Security Essentials was not worth it and would even list you some AV companies so you could install a proper antivirus software. Through Windows versions, they kept improving their built-in security software, and it had become a brand new program, which we now refer to as Windows Defender. As they kept updating it, we saw a greater antivirus each time, to the point where you now can rely on it as your primary solution for a daily basis. Microsoft no longer recommends other suites to protect your system.

From a basic security to a recommended software being updated and improved by specialists, acquring new technologies to make it even better.

What do you think Microsoft's play is here? Are they trying to banish AV industry and create the perfect protection so users do not have to rely on third parties? If so, why would they care so much? Are they planning to turn it into a paid software in the future? Pretty much every AV that offers a free version, is backed up by a paid version or ads to get some cash incomes.

Why would a software developer try so hard to offer a free product? What are we missing? Delight us with your answer and thoughts.

It's not free in reality. It's the base of their endpoint which is a paid product. You just get the baseline product because they only have to gain from it.

 

[Antimalware18]

Just as everyone said, They're going for a baseline security app.

which is exactly what it is to me. I decided to put it side by side against Bitdefender free in VM's yesterday (scanning detections, no execution) and it failed miserably. Out of the pack that I scanned (forgot the total # of samples)

Defender Detected 2
Bitdefender free detected 13

As someone said in a thread I was reading yesterday: I'm not ready to wake windows defender up from its graveyard

 

[mekelek]

Does anyone have this issue too that you disable every single module of WD but it still keeps popping up messages about finding threats? so annoying while testing..

 

[ForgottenSeer 19494]

Does anyone have this issue too that you disable every single module of WD but it still keeps popping up messages and ##### about finding threats? so annoying while testing..

Have you disabled Limited Periodic scanning? Is there some process running of WD?

 

[mekelek]

Have you disabled Limited Periodic scanning? Is there some process running of WD?

I just disabled all the options you can find in the settings of WD.

 

[SHvFl]

Does anyone have this issue too that you disable every single module of WD but it still keeps popping up messages and ##### about finding threats? so annoying while testing..

Disable it from registry or group policy(pro/enterprise/student versions) and you will not see anything again.

 

[mekelek]

Disable it from registry or group policy(pro/enterprise/student versions) and you will not see anything again.

yea well it's on a testing VM, doesn't worth making a new snapshot for it

 

[ForgottenSeer 19494]

There are many more options for Windows Defender in the Local Group Policy than visible in Settings, incl. the one for disabling Windows Defender service which SHvFi mentioned.

 

[mekelek]

There are many more options for Windows Defender in the Local Group Policy than visible in Settings, incl. the one for disabling Windows Defender service which SHvFi mentioned.

Microsoft is not known to make their things be easily configurable, gotta hide those options deep in the middle of nowhere!

 

[S3cur1ty 3nthu5145t]

Just as everyone said, They're going for a baseline security app.

which is exactly what it is to me. I decided to put it side by side against Bitdefender free in VM's yesterday (scanning detections, no execution) and it failed miserably. Out of the pack that I scanned (forgot the total # of samples)

Defender Detected 2
Bitdefender free detected 13

As someone said in a thread I was reading yesterday: I'm not ready to wake windows defender up from its graveyard

May I ask if you we're using Windows 10 as your Guest Machine, if so, did you have Smartscreen enabled during your testing, and did you have to allow each sample through Smartscreen?

 

[brambedkar59]

Does anyone have this issue too that you disable every single module of WD but it still keeps popping up messages about finding threats? so annoying while testing..

I think that's intentional from MS, it will be enabled after some time automatically if it's disabled. Just disable either using Registry or GPEDIT.msc.

 

[Antimalware18]

May I ask if you we're using Windows 10 as your Guest Machine, if so, did you have Smartscreen enabled during your testing, and did you have to allow each sample through Smartscreen?

It was as admit with smartscreen disabled. But I didn't execute the samples. Was just testing static detection.

 

[FreddyFreeloader]

It was as admit with smartscreen disabled. But I didn't execute the samples. Was just testing static detection.

Try .exc them and see what happens, they got a cloud now.

 

[Antimalware18]

Try .exc them and see what happens, they got a cloud now.

I saw that in the settings (what little settings there was, cant complain though BD free after all lol) but the cloud only works for on-execution?

and how strong is said cloud?

 

[Deleted member 178]

Why people test WinDef without Smartscreen...we aren't on Win7 + MSE

Win10 CU now has Windows Defender Security Center, (including WD + SS + WinFW) , it is a "pseudo-suite" , so must be tested as a whole; even MRG is considering to test it this way.

 

[509322]

Does anyone have this issue too that you disable every single module of WD but it still keeps popping up messages about finding threats? so annoying while testing..

This is how SillySoft designed it. Those alerts are intended and part of the basis of Kaspersky filing suit against SillySoft.

 

[509322]

Just as everyone said, They're going for a baseline security app.

which is exactly what it is to me. I decided to put it side by side against Bitdefender free in VM's yesterday (scanning detections, no execution) and it failed miserably. Out of the pack that I scanned (forgot the total # of samples)

Defender Detected 2
Bitdefender free detected 13

As someone said in a thread I was reading yesterday: I'm not ready to wake windows defender up from its graveyard

Bitdefender free is good. Actually, I think it is better than the paid product in some important respects.

The only problem is that it is offered "As-is" and does not receive the maintenance updates like the paid products.