Think Windows's Built-In Antivirus Will Keep You Safe? You're Wrong

[blueblackwow65]

How about resource usage ram and cpu?

 

[Deleted Member 333v73x]

@blueblackwow65 It's really different, sometimes it's around 30MB sometimes it's 120MB it constantly changing, when it is scanning/removing it shoots up to 100+ MB RAM and 40% CPU.

 

[blueblackwow65]

Wow that is alot , I might wait to try it ,might not need it with comodo . Thks

 

[Deleted Member 333v73x]

Wow that is alot , I might wait to try it ,might not need it with comodo . Thks

CIS of CF? WD is a standalone product and would ONLY work with CF. Although the resource usage is high I genuinely feel faster than I did with Avira, Avast!, AVG, Kaspersky and others!

 

[blueblackwow65]

CCAV

 

[Deleted Member 333v73x]

Comodo Cloud Antivirus is standalone I believe, better ask someone in the Comodo forum/Comodo section here (I have little experience with any Comodo products apart from Comodo Firewall and their browsers).

 

[Deleted Member 333v73x]

I dumped 3rd party antivirus software back when I made the move to Windows 8 when it released.

Since then I have been using Windows Defender and have been infection free for 5 years in total (3 years under Windows Defender.)

The best protection is what lies between the screen and the keyboard, safe web practices, being self aware and on alert to what you let onto your PC and run has kept me virus/malware free all these years, not any standalone antivirus application, just myself.

Keep UAC enabled, ensure Windows & other applications up to date, check files against VirusTotal & Anubis, Click-to-play Flash etc.
Download installers from sites such as Softpedia, FIleHippo, Majorgeeks to avoid adware wrapped installers like CNET uses, always be sure to uncheck the optional offer boxes when installing an application, Unchecky can even do that for you though I do it manually to be sure. Adblockers also serve as a security measure against hijacked/rogue ads.

There's more one can do but I won't get into all that, you've got MalwareTips at your fingertips and plenty of threads for information.

Though I of course have precautions as not even the most security aware user is perfectly safe since there are constantly new exploits & holes being discovered and always new malware and threats in the wild and not just the ones white hats or grey hats reveal.

Safe browsing habits can only go so far and there's always a risk of something slipping through.

- VTHash
(A simple right click and quick look at VirusTotal results, handy and easy but limited in file size, good enough for smaller files)

- Fortnightly scheduled scans with Malwarebytes & Hitman Pro.
(A second opinion always helps, though neither of these have found a threat in years)

- Backup & System Images: 2x 3TB EXHDD in RAID 1 for all my files and media of importance for safe keeping.
(With the rising threats of ransomware and crypto-based threats this is essential and does good for peace of mind)

(Free software such as TinyWall and Windows Firewall Control for much better use out of Windows Firewall)

Will Windows Defender protect a reckless user or average joe who downloads/runs potentially unsafe/dangerous executables or does unsafe web practices, doesn't keep their applications up to date, does warez, rushes through installs and never unchecks optional offers boxes, clicks and visits hazardous websites, short weak passwords, outdated flash/java and more, getting phished etc?

Likely no, depending if MSE/WD have a signature and catches the threat /assuming the user doesn't click allow and skip on the UAC/SmartScreen prompt but that's just for executables.


I agree and in the end it's down to the user educating themselves on safe practices, should be second nature not to run an unknown file without first making sure it's safe.

I've cleaned numerous PCs over the years all with different security software such as Norton, Kaspersky, ESET, BitDefender, Avast Free, McAfee and others and still the user managed to infect themselves and complained why their PC is performing slow thinking that their AV was meant to provide 100%.

In my opinion:

It will always be down to the user to safe guard his or her PC from threats and not just think their antivirus will do all the work.

No antivirus can provide 100% protection to a user that is both reckless or dangerous in what they browse and download/run.


If I were to switch to 3rd party I'd personally pick Emsisoft, the most attracting part for me being it's very minimal data sharing.

But since I've managed to stay 5 years infection free I have no need for 3rd party even though I agree they're often better than WD.

Everyday criminals look for anyway and new ways possible to exploit money digitally and it's only going to get more sophisticated.
Takes more than just an antivirus application to guard against that, one should instead focus on covering every angle.

Thanks.

Excellent advice by one of our brilliant members of staff.

 

[Vasudev]

I dumped 3rd party antivirus software back when I made the move to Windows 8 when it released.

Since then I have been using Windows Defender and have been infection free for 5 years in total (3 years under Windows Defender.)

The best protection is what lies between the screen and the keyboard, safe web practices, being self aware and on alert to what you let onto your PC and run has kept me virus/malware free all these years, not any standalone antivirus application, just myself.

Keep UAC enabled, ensure Windows & other applications up to date, check files against VirusTotal & Anubis, Click-to-play Flash etc.
Download installers from sites such as Softpedia, FIleHippo, Majorgeeks to avoid adware wrapped installers like CNET uses, always be sure to uncheck the optional offer boxes when installing an application, Unchecky can even do that for you though I do it manually to be sure. Adblockers also serve as a security measure against hijacked/rogue ads.

There's more one can do but I won't get into all that, you've got MalwareTips at your fingertips and plenty of threads for information.

Though I of course have precautions as not even the most security aware user is perfectly safe since there are constantly new exploits & holes being discovered and always new malware and threats in the wild and not just the ones white hats or grey hats reveal.

Safe browsing habits can only go so far and there's always a risk of something slipping through.

- VTHash
(A simple right click and quick look at VirusTotal results, handy and easy but limited in file size, good enough for smaller files)

- Fortnightly scheduled scans with Malwarebytes & Hitman Pro.
(A second opinion always helps, though neither of these have found a threat in years)

- Backup & System Images: 2x 3TB EXHDD in RAID 1 for all my files and media of importance for safe keeping.
(With the rising threats of ransomware and crypto-based threats this is essential and does good for peace of mind)

(Free software such as TinyWall and Windows Firewall Control for much better use out of Windows Firewall)

Will Windows Defender protect a reckless user or average joe who downloads/runs potentially unsafe/dangerous executables or does unsafe web practices, doesn't keep their applications up to date, does warez, rushes through installs and never unchecks optional offers boxes, clicks and visits hazardous websites, short weak passwords, outdated flash/java and more, getting phished etc?

Likely no, depending if MSE/WD have a signature and catches the threat /assuming the user doesn't click allow and skip on the UAC/SmartScreen prompt but that's just for executables.


I agree and in the end it's down to the user educating themselves on safe practices, should be second nature not to run an unknown file without first making sure it's safe.

I've cleaned numerous PCs over the years all with different security software such as Norton, Kaspersky, ESET, BitDefender, Avast Free, McAfee and others and still the user managed to infect themselves and complained why their PC is performing slow thinking that their AV was meant to provide 100%.

In my opinion:

It will always be down to the user to safe guard his or her PC from threats and not just think their antivirus will do all the work.

No antivirus can provide 100% protection to a user that is both reckless or dangerous in what they browse and download/run.


If I were to switch to 3rd party I'd personally pick Emsisoft, the most attracting part for me being it's very minimal data sharing.

But since I've managed to stay 5 years infection free I have no need for 3rd party even though I agree they're often better than WD.

Everyday criminals look for anyway and new ways possible to exploit money digitally and it's only going to get more sophisticated.
Takes more than just an antivirus application to guard against that, one should instead focus on covering every angle.

Thanks.

The same can be said, when I installed MSE on xp & then continued to use it on w7 as well. Not once I've been infected over the years. Before MSE, I had to use/change to every AV co. trial versions every 30 days just to stay protected, afterwards, I ran into some problems mostly conflicting drivers and so. Since WD is baked into the OS itself, bare essentials of protecting the PC Out of the Box is ensured w/o even resorting to downloading files and updating it from scratch(for other AVs).

 

[frogboy]

Windows Defender has come a long way and maybe one day will be good enough to protect all machines but for the moment a 3rd party is still the way to go.

 

[Crystal_Lake_Camper]

Windows Defender has come a long way and maybe one day will be good enough to protect all machines but for the moment a 3rd party is still the way to go.

discribed like a true gentleman defender is on a good path , but I still find it hard to swallow , to put all of my trust in it completely. a third party software has my vote also for the moment.

 

[Dirk41]

How do you explain that in December in av-test , defender on 8.1 got as many points as eset in protection?
AV-TEST – The Independent IT-Security Institute

If you trust eset, why not defender , plus anti adware feature enabled

 

[_CyberGhosT_]

If you trust eset, why not defender , plus anti adware feature enabled

I think it would boil down to it's author at this point, maybe he trusts Eset over MS in which case he may have a point. PeAcE

 

[Dirk41]

Well I am not an expert, I wasn't saying the author of the thread isn't right, only wanted an opinion

 

[_CyberGhosT_]

It's all good brother, i was just pointing out that, the most logical assumption aside from the scores you refer to would be the authors, and I would trust Eset over MS any day. PeAcE

 

[jamescv7]

Actually those methodology created by AV-Test and other organizations, may possible reflect its possible 'special treatment' but who knows? So to the performance of Windows Defender then its not impossible.

 

[Cats-4_Owners-2]

Ever since the day I'd arrived upon this Island Fortress of Security (AKA: Malware Tips) knowledgeable members & staff have encouraged my faith in both (native) Windows Defender & Windows Firewall from 8.1 to the present. That, and the use of exercising sensibilities (scanning @virustotal.com) as well as proceeding with cautious patience when initiating executables by <clicking> knowingly. I've also come to believe test driving software is invaluable as when making a decision & trying out automotive vehicles when searching for which works best for oneself personally. Too bad we couldn't keep new cars for a whole month before paying & deciding whether they are truly the right choice at the right time for us!

 

[Sana]

Ever since the day I'd arrived upon this Island Fortress of Security (AKA: Malware Tips) knowledgeable members & staff have encouraged my faith in both (native) Windows Defender & Windows Firewall from 8.1 to the present. That, and the use of exercising sensibilities (scanning @virustotal.com) as well as proceeding with cautious patience when initiating executables by <clicking> knowingly. I've also come to believe test driving software is invaluable as when making a decision & trying out automotive vehicles when searching for which works best for oneself personally. Too bad we couldn't keep new cars for a whole month before paying & deciding whether they are truly the right choice at the right time for us!

Cars can be a totally different story, since they're mass produced and some major faults only come to light later on during its life; and that too because cars under warranty get defective parts sent back to base. But if you do truly want to try a car, just rent it for a day or even test drive it aggressively
I say aggressively in the sense as to push it to its limits and be comfortable knowing that you're in control. Other tips:

• Be one with the car (yes or no)
• Reverse parking / viewing angles (love them hatchbacks)
• Try curvy bends / roundabouts
• Try it out on a rainy day; as you'd get a feel for its traction control

 

[Cats-4_Owners-2]

Cars can be a totally different story, since they're mass produced and some major faults only come to light later on during its life; and that too because cars under warranty get defective parts sent back to base. But if you do truly want to try a car, just rent it for a day or even test drive it aggressively
I say aggressively in the sense as to push it to its limits and be comfortable knowing that you're in control. Other tips:

• Be one with the car (yes or no)
• Reverse parking / viewing angles (love them hatchbacks)
• Try curvy bends / roundabouts
• Try it out on a rainy day; as you'd get a feel for its traction control

Well said indeed!
I especially loved the image of flying into a curvy bend with the rain pattering down hard upon the windshield. ...and then the satisfying feel of the tires & traction kicking in to carry us safely back home amidst the quiet safety of Wayne Manor, & back into the Bat Cave.