Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Andy Ful" data-source="post: 972701" data-attributes="member: 32260">I do not have any serious objections to this test and testing methodology. On the contrary, it is a very interesting test and I fully agree with the conclusions that follow from it. You decided to use default Windows built-in security as reference protection and some other testing labs made the decision to test Defender ATP (or a similar paid version).Anyway, the picture that follows from the test is only one-sided. Many people can see the world differently than Microsoft and AV testing labs. They do not hesitate to use PowerShell or the well known and trusted 3rd party tools to get for free most of Microsoft ATP. You may think it crazy, but this is even proposed in some IT books (like CompTIA Security + Guide to Network Security Fundamentals By Mark Ciampa) and several respected sources (BleepingComputer.com, Ghacks.net, Computerworld.com, etc.).Anyone here will probably agree with you. But, it seems that you would like to convince Microsoft about something and this is a waste of time. Microsoft already sells Defender with ATP features (not the free version) and clearly say that Defender free is for home users. I also doubt if Microsoft would accept using Defender free in this test among COMODO Advanced Endpoint Protection, F-Secure Total, G Data Total Security, Kaspersky Total Security, etc. They would probably suggest using Defender for Endpoint. Of course, this does not mean that Microsoft would be right, because many people in the (very) small businesses use default Defender free, anyway.<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite130" alt="(y)" title="Thumbs up&nbsp; &nbsp; (y)" loading="lazy" data-shortname="(y)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Andy Ful, post: 972701, member: 32260"] I do not have any serious objections to this test and testing methodology. On the contrary, it is a very interesting test and I fully agree with the conclusions that follow from it. You decided to use default Windows built-in security as reference protection and some other testing labs made the decision to test Defender ATP (or a similar paid version). Anyway, the picture that follows from the test is only one-sided. Many people can see the world differently than Microsoft and AV testing labs. They do not hesitate to use PowerShell or the well known and trusted 3rd party tools to get for free most of Microsoft ATP. You may think it crazy, but this is even proposed in some IT books (like CompTIA Security + Guide to Network Security Fundamentals By Mark Ciampa) and several respected sources (BleepingComputer.com, Ghacks.net, Computerworld.com, etc.). Anyone here will probably agree with you. But, it seems that you would like to convince Microsoft about something and this is a waste of time. Microsoft already sells Defender with ATP features (not the free version) and clearly say that Defender free is for home users. I also doubt if Microsoft would accept using Defender free in this test among COMODO Advanced Endpoint Protection, F-Secure Total, G Data Total Security, Kaspersky Total Security, etc. They would probably suggest using Defender for Endpoint. Of course, this does not mean that Microsoft would be right, because many people in the (very) small businesses use default Defender free, anyway.(y) [/QUOTE]

Verification