Windows Defender Is Becoming the Powerful Antivirus That Windows 10 Needs

[Exterminator]

Content source

http://news.softpedia.com/news/windows-defender-is-becoming-the-powerful-antivirus-that-windows-10-needs-499629.shtml

There was a time when third-party antivirus protection was absolutely needed in Windows, but it turns out that Microsoft has improved its very own solution to a level that makes such applications unnecessary in the latest iteration of the operating system.

Windows Defender, which comes pre-installed and enabled by default in both Windows 8.1 and Windows 10, performs significantly better in antivirus tests than it did a couple of years ago and is now achieving better results that well-known security suites.

The latest round of tests performed by German institute AV-TEST shows that Windows Defender improved on both Windows 8.1 and Windows 10 and although it’s still not among the leaders, it’s not the last in the charts either.

Maximum points for usability
As far as Windows 8.1 is concerned, Windows Defender received 4.5 points (out of 6) for protection and performance, and 6 points for usability. This isn’t the best score, but Windows Defender has anyway managed to detect most of the threats, with only one solution actually blocking all malware and getting the e maximum score – Kaspersky Antivirus.

The good thing is that Windows Defender is not the last security app anymore, as both Cylance and Seqrite, which are currently installed only on a small percentage of computers, achieved a lower score.

On Windows 10, however, Windows Defender really exceeded expectations. Microsoft’s default Windows antivirus received 4.5 points for protection, 5 points for performance, and 6 points for usability, ranking better than highly-praised security software such as F-Secure, Panda Security, ESET, and Comodo.

Certainly, there’s still room to improve, but Windows Defender is developing quite nicely and Microsoft is very keen on continuing these updates for even better security in Windows.

On the other hand, keep in mind that neither Windows Defender nor third-party antivirus software is 100 percent effective, so unless you really think twice before clicking suspicious links and downloading files coming from unknown sources, your computer could still get infected with malware.

This is evident and Microsoft could use some positive PR for a change!

 

[conceptualclarity]

On Windows 10, however, Windows Defender really exceeded expectations. Microsoft’s default Windows antivirus received 4.5 points for protection, 5 points for performance, and 6 points for usability, ranking better than highly-praised security software such as F-Secure, Panda Security, ESET, and Comodo.

Beating those four? Amazing! If I had to bet, though, I'd figure that result will be an outlier rather than a result that will hold up. Time will tell.

 

[Kuttz]

Reason for Windows defender improvement may be likely due to the more and more windows defender users with windows 10 already crossed 200 million users. Just my guess though.

 

[Blackhawk]

It may have improved, but will it continue to improve which it needs to, and be consistent at the same time? I have my doubts as I have seen many over the years do good for a short period of time and then fall back never achieving any real consistency. Those noted in the article, F-Secure, Panda Security, ESET, and Comodo, I don't consider them to be top players. IMO, Kaspersky, Bitdefender, and Avira are consistently the top players.

 

[SloppyMcFloppy]

Windows Defender is decent enough, but it still lacks of web protection, no HIPS or BB, and no anti exploit protection integrated into Windows Defender, and mail scanner. That basically said that Windows Defender is similar to Avira Free where it depend on signatures all the time.

 

[safe1st]

Like myself, just started use it 7 hours ago lol

 

[SecretKeeper]

I'll probably set up a VM and take a look myself. I'll be surprised if it has actually plucked itself up after all these years.

 

[DracusNarcrym]

I'm glad Windows Defender is starting to become such a worthwhile Windows feature, and I do hope that there will come a time when the only security components that users are going to need for baseline protection in their computers are the built-in Windows features.

 

[illumination]

WD is definitely improving for sure, but beating the other suites as stated in those test, well, its all in the details. If I remember correctly, WD's 0-day score it was like 90% where as Esets score was 98.3% and Comodo's score was 100%. Both Eset and Comodo and a few others were penalized for false positives.

Microsoft still has a way to go, although it appears they are on the right track.

 

[Nightwalker]

Windows Defender + EMET + SmartScreen + Windows Firewall + UAC is a very decent security combo, it will only become better with time.

 

[DracusNarcrym]

Windows Defender + EMET + SmartScreen + Windows Firewall + UAC is a very decent security combo, it will only become better with time.

If only Microsoft would also take more advantage of the so-called Mandatory Integrity Control feature...

Windows would be a fortress on its own.

 

[Ink]

I'll probably set up a VM and take a look myself. I'll be surprised if it has actually plucked itself up after all these years.

You will more than likely experience WD to miss samples, rendering the PC unusable.

 

[Azure]

It may have improved, but will it continue to improve which it needs to, and be consistent at the same time? I have my doubts as I have seen many over the years do good for a short period of time and then fall back never achieving any real consistency. Those noted in the article, F-Secure, Panda Security, ESET, and Comodo, I don't consider them to be top players. IMO, Kaspersky, Bitdefender, and Avira are consistently the top players.

Yep. That's the keyword here "consistency".

Windows Defender is decent enough, but it still lacks of web protection, no HIPS or BB, and no anti exploit protection integrated into Windows Defender, and mail scanner. That basically said that Windows Defender is similar to Avira Free where it depend on signatures all the time.

I feel like Microsoft is in the best position to make a very good, maybe the best, behavior blocker. The know the inside-out of any mechanism and working of their OSes. At the very least make the option available for advance users if they are concern about false positives or something.

 

[Ink]

Windows Defender is decent enough, but it still lacks of web protection, no HIPS or BB, and no anti exploit protection integrated into Windows Defender, and mail scanner. That basically said that Windows Defender is similar to Avira Free where it depend on signatures all the time.

Web Protection = Smartscreen in Edge/IE
Exploit Protection = Windows Updates (security patches for Windows and Flash player)
PUA Protection = Registry Tweak

 

[DracusNarcrym]

Web Protection = Smartscreen in Edge/IE
Exploit Protection = Windows Updates (security patches for Windows and Flash player)
PUA Protection = Registry Tweak

Advanced users can also take advantage of Microsoft's underlying MIC (Mandatory Integrity Control) mechanisms to further enhance the security of Windows, using various utilities, such as icacls.exe.

 

[frogboy]

It is sure showing some promise.

 

[Exterminator]

I think the point being that it has improved is the key here.I don't think anyone is implying that it is better than those third party security programs with HIPS & BB's etc. but that it has significantly improved.An improvement that has it now being compared to 3rd party security programs.I think it is already a viable free alternative when combined with the other built in security features.
Most are concerned about system impact when choosing a security program.The "lightest" option available is probably WD,Smartscreen,WF & UAC.Maybe one day this will not only be the "lightest" option but also the best option.
You have to keep in mind that operator error accounts for the majority of infections.

 

[DracusNarcrym]

You have to keep in mind that operator error accounts for the majority of infections.

This is very true. User carelessness or mishandling of potential threats is the prime cause of infections.

 

[cruelsister]

It has been shown previously that Defender on Windows 10 is a great deal stronger than Defender on Win 7 (or 8). The difference is significant enough that they shouldn't even be compared.

 

[Online_Sword]

I often consider a problem. Just like IE, WD is free and is bound to Windows, so if one day WD really becomes a very powerful product, would the 3rd-party vendors suffer the similar fate with Netscape?