Windows Defender Evolves but Still Boasts Basic Antivirus Features, Tests Show

[Exterminator]

Windows Defender Evolves but Still Boasts Basic Antivirus Features, Tests Show
AV-Comparatives unveiled 2016’s best antivirus products earlier today, and the organization also discussed the performance of Windows Defender, the built-in Windows 10 antivirus that’s installed by default in the operating system.

Microsoft is putting a lot of effort into Windows Defender, but although it’s obvious that the antivirus is evolving, it still provides basic protection to users when compared to third-party antivirus solutions on the market.

The chart you can see here provides a look at Windows Defender’s performance in the 2016 tests conducted by AV-Comparatives, and Microsoft’s antivirus is once again the last in the top, with “standard” performance in file detection, performance, and real-world protection. Better performance, however, was experienced in the malware removal tests, but it’s far behind third-party products like Kaspersky and Bitdefender.

AV-Comparatives, however, praised the antivirus, explaining that it comes with the essential feature package that you should find in an advanced security product these days.

“Windows Defender for Windows 10 has all the essential features of a good antivirus program in a very clear, simple interface,” the organization says.

The future of Windows Defender
Windows Defender is evolving even further with the upcoming Windows 10 Creators Update, and Microsoft is pushing the antivirus to a more advanced product with a new name = Windows Defender Security Center – and more features, including parental controls.

What Microsoft is trying to do with the Creators Update is group all security features available in Windows into just a single app for easy access. As a result, Windows Defender will be more than just an antivirus, but it will continue offering scanning and malware removal options too.

Windows Defender will play nice with third-party products and will always be there on the system, and users can enable the app to automatically scan the system even when a different antivirus is installed. This way, they can make sure that no malware reaches user data, thus providing a secondary security layer on all systems.

 

[Andy Ful]

It is all true. But, people can talk endlessly about which is better: Windows 7 with Kaspersky or Windows 10 with WD + SmartScreen.

 

[Deleted member 178]

When testing AVs on Win10, most test Labs disable Smartscreen and UAC if not all samples will be flagged as suspicious; then WD i used as comparison basis; so to me Windows' native security is above all of any 3rd party vendors and their fancy features. Now if the user allow the malware...

 

[Andy Ful]

Many people can say: Kaspersky on Windows 10 + SmartScreen is better, than WD on Windows 10 + SmartScreen. Yet, the problem is more complicated. When running the file with SmartScreen warning and no Kaspesky alert, most people will ignore SmartScreen. So, I agree that the true test should compare Kaspersky against WD + SmartScreen. Yet, in such test the second competitor will be disqualified for too many false positives.

 

[509322]

Many people can say: Kaspersky on Windows 10 + SmartScreen is better, than WD on Windows 10 + SmartScreen. Yet, the problem is more complicated. When someone runs the file with SmartScreen warning and no Kaspesky alert, most people will ignore SmartScreen. So, I agree that the true test should compare Kaspersky against WD + SmartScreen. Yet, in such test the second competitor will be disqualified for too many false positives.

It's pointless. These type discussions always devolve into a rabble debate.

 

[Andy Ful]

I can agree.
So, before someone is going to be irritated, I can say that I like all good antimalware/antivirus solutions (Kaspersky, Emsisoft, etc.). I also appreciate AV-Comparatives tests. I posted, because in Windows 10 security things become complicated. The system is quickly evolving, so there are problems for antivirus developers to adjust swiftly their products. Some users, can choose WD + Smartscreen to avoid compatibility/stability issues, accepting false positives issue.

 

[Dirk41]

Thank you for sharing @Exterminator !

Some people in the Internet stop reading AV comparatives at page 12.
Better to go ahead and read page 70+

@Umbra interesting , we should really ask AV comparatives of they disable smartscreen . In some YT videos it pop ups and would save user from ransomware

 

[Deleted member 178]

Thank you for sharing @Exterminator !

Some people in the Internet stop reading AV comparatives at page 12.
Better to go ahead and read page 70+

@Umbra interesting , we should really ask AV comparatives of they disable smartscreen . In some YT videos it pop ups and would save user from ransomware

in fact the ex-mod of the malware hub, did all his tests with smartscreen and UAC enabled , SS block all samples , he has too do the dumb guy allowing them to continue his test.

AV-C used Win7 on their latest real world protection, so no system-wide Smartscreen. Real-World Protection Test July - November 2016 - AV-Comparatives
AV-test don't mention win10 native security settings at all, but WD get 97% rating. AV-TEST – The Independent IT-Security Institute

 

[Andy Ful]

For lazy people (from 72 page, https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/avc_sum_201612_en.pdf):

What features does the program have?
Windows Defender for Windows 10 is a straightforward antivirus program; Microsoft’s Windows Firewall is also integrated into the operating system.

Where can I find more information about the product?
Windows 10 – Windows Defender - Microsoft

What we liked about the program
Windows Defender for Windows 10 has all the essential features of a good antivirus program in a very clear, simple interface.

Tips for users
This review relates to Windows Defender for Windows 10, which is a complete anti-malware program built into the operating system. Windows 8 and 8.1 also include a similar complete antivirus program called Windows Defender. However, in Windows 7 and Windows Vista, the integrated program called “Windows Defender” is NOT a complete antimalware program; it only protects against adware and spyware, and should be supplemented by a full antivirus program.

 

[RejZoR]

Windows Defender is an equivalent of antiviruses from around 2005-2010 era. I don't think it even has any extensive file based heuristics capability, let alone fast reacting cloud or behavior blocker. That's like trusting an airbag which fires up 5 minutes after crash...

Not to mention how slow it is in real-time. My Downloads folder is sorted by date and opening it with WD means I have to sit there and wait 20 seconds for files to get sorted. This is on super fast SSD backed with ultra fast hexacore CPU and 32 gigs of RAM! With avast! for example, half a second. I don't get it what MS is doing with the scan engine to be so sluggish.

 

[Andy Ful]

Windows Defender is an equivalent of antiviruses from around 2005-2010 era. I don't think it even has any extensive file based heuristics capability, let alone fast reacting cloud or behavior blocker. That's like trusting an airbag which fires up 5 minutes after crash...

Not to mention how slow it is in real-time. My Downloads folder is sorted by date and opening it with WD means I have to sit there and wait 20 seconds for files to get sorted. This is on super fast SSD backed with ultra fast hexacore CPU and 32 gigs of RAM! With avast! for example, half a second. I don't get it what MS is doing with the scan engine to be so sluggish.

It would be simpler to post one sentence: 'I hate Windows Defender'.
Most of your statements can be true (except 'Windows Defender is an equivalent of antiviruses from around 2005-2010 era'). And it is also true, that some users with Avast on board had serious issues with Windows 10 Unniversary Update:
Reasons why Avast fails in Windows 10 Anniversary Update
As I said, in Windows 10 security things become complicated.

 

[Deleted member 178]

Windows Defender is an equivalent of antiviruses from around 2005-2010 era.

i rather use WD than those flawed 3rd party AVs , no issues on the system , no conflicts, no kernel hooks, no faulty drivers, no BSODs , no screwed system (a la Webroot) , etc... essentially, no BS.

I don't think it even has any extensive file based heuristics capability, let alone fast reacting cloud or behavior blocker. That's like trusting an airbag which fires up 5 minutes after crash...

We are on Win10, its native security must be taken as a whole package (SUA + Smartscreen + UAC + WinDef + WinFW) , and it will be in the next upgrade of Win10 with the Windows Security Center thingy.
I guess when you test a 3rd party AV, you don't just test the AV module and ditch the other features...
For heuristic, indeed it could be better, but why the need when smartscreen catches almost everything WD missed.

Not to mention how slow it is in real-time. My Downloads folder is sorted by date and opening it with WD means I have to sit there and wait 20 seconds for files to get sorted. This is on super fast SSD backed with ultra fast hexacore CPU and 32 gigs of RAM! With avast! for example, half a second. I don't get it what MS is doing with the scan engine to be so sluggish.

Really? i just fast scanned my portable folder (100+ portables apps for a total of 50k+ items; it took around 3mn) on an i5 and 6gb ram...

anyway, im not the kind of user, just staring at the screen and waiting for the scan to complete to do anything on the machine.

 

[XhenEd]

Some of my problems with Windows Defender: sluggish scanning, sluggish opening of folders full of files, sluggish system startup, and consumes a lot of CPU power for a considerable amount of time when it does something.

Those are the reasons I don't use WD. Of course, those were my experiences with it. Others might not have experienced those at all.

I agree that WD is improving. That's why if those problems are gone, I'll probably use it again as my main AV.

 

[509322]

no screwed system (a la Webroot)

What happened ?

 

[Andy Ful]

...
Not to mention how slow it is in real-time. My Downloads folder is sorted by date and opening it with WD means I have to sit there and wait 20 seconds for files to get sorted. This is on super fast SSD backed with ultra fast hexacore CPU and 32 gigs of RAM! With avast! for example, half a second. I don't get it what MS is doing with the scan engine to be so sluggish.
...

I had this issue 2 years ago with Windows 8. Now, in Windows 10 everything seems normal. Yet, the cloud response will take sometimes several minutes. I could complain about Windows Defender all the day.
Edit.
It is like an old dog, that is getting younger.

 

[Deleted member 178]

What happened ?

Windows system file FPs -> OS screwed -> go reformat .

Lucky i didn't used WSA at that time

 

[509322]

Windows system file FPs -> OS screwed -> go reformat .

Lucky i didn't used WSA at that time

That's because Webroot doesn't add Windows files to their signature databases automatically immediately after Windows updates and upgrades. They simply whitelist "Microsoft" and C:\Windows. If the user sets WSA heuristics to "Block any file that isn't specifically whitelisted," then there will be at least a few blocked system files.

 

[RejZoR]

i rather use WD than those flawed 3rd party AVs , no issues on the system , no conflicts, no kernel hooks, no faulty drivers, no BSODs , no screwed system (a la Webroot) , etc... essentially, no BS.


We are on Windows 10, its native security must be taken as a whole package (SUA + Smartscreen + UAC + WinDef + WinFW) , and it will be in the next upgrade of Windows 10 with the Windows Security Center thingy.
I guess when you test a 3rd party AV, you don't just test the AV module and ditch the other features...
For heuristic, indeed it could be better, but why the need when smartscreen catches almost everything WD missed.



Really? i just fast scanned my portable folder (100+ portables apps for a total of 50k+ items; it took around 3mn) on an i5 and 6gb ram...

anyway, im not the kind of user, just staring at the screen and waiting for the scan to complete to do anything on the machine.

Not on demand scan, just going into the folder and then having to wait for files to get sorted by date. It's ridiculous.

 

[Vasudev]

WD is fast and light if you have tons of RAM and SSD. WD scanned around 5 million files in under 15 mins on my system. On my older hdd based PC, it takes long time.

 

[Dirk41]

in fact the ex-mod of the malware hub, did all his tests with smartscreen and UAC enabled , SS block all samples , he has too do the dumb guy allowing them to continue his test.

AV-C used Windows 7 on their latest real world protection, so no system-wide Smartscreen. Real-World Protection Test July - November 2016 - AV-Comparatives
AV-test don't mention Windows 10 native security settings at all, but WD get 97% rating. AV-TEST – The Independent IT-Security Institute

As far as I know AV-C use w7 in real world test but w10 in the other tests
Sorry if I am wrong

For lazy people (from 72 page, https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/avc_sum_201612_en.pdf):

What features does the program have?
Windows Defender for Windows 10 is a straightforward antivirus program; Microsoft’s Windows Firewall is also integrated into the operating system.

Where can I find more information about the product?
Windows 10 – Windows Defender - Microsoft

What we liked about the program
Windows Defender for Windows 10 has all the essential features of a good antivirus program in a very clear, simple interface.

Tips for users
This review relates to Windows Defender for Windows 10, which is a complete anti-malware program built into the operating system. Windows 8 and 8.1 also include a similar complete antivirus program called Windows Defender. However, in Windows 7 and Windows Vista, the integrated program called “Windows Defender” is NOT a complete antimalware program; it only protects against adware and spyware, and should be supplemented by a full antivirus program.

Yes, exactly what I was referring to



@Umbra AV test let UAC an smartscreen at default settings . I asked that to them months ago. If I got right .
Try ask you too if you want