Windows Defender - June 2019 Report

[Evjl's Rain]

BR: before reboot
AR: after reboot

WD Default settings​
June 2019​	Samples Pack​	Static Detection​	Dynamic Detection​	Total Detection​	Bait files encrypted​	System Status​	Links​
23/06/2019​	1​	0/1​	1*/1​	1*/1​	Yes​	Infected​	#6​
25/06/2019​	14​	5/14​	7/9​	12/14​	No​	Protected ​	#2​
28/06/2019​	24​	8/24​	9(+5)*/16​	17(+5)*/24​	No​	Infected​	#2​
02/07/2019​	17​	5/17​	6/12​	11/17​	No​	Infected​	#3​
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
WD Max settings​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
02/07/2019​	16​	8/16​	6/8​	14/16​	No​	Infected (BR) Protected (AR)​	#2​
04/07/2019​	15​	2/15​	12*/13​	14*/15​	No​	Infected​	#2​
06/07/2019​	1​	0/1​	0/1​	0/1​	No​	Infected​	#3​
09/07/2019​	19​	5/19​	13*/14​	18*/19​	No​	Infected/Not Clean​	#6​
09/07/2019​	14​	7/14​	7*/7​	14*/14​	No​	Infected/Not Clean​	#2​

 

[beavisviruses]

Not good results .... please test New Norton thanks

 

[LDogg]

And this why a normal home user off MWT should be using WD, WD for MWT can be a very good standalone "AV" for oneself asnthey have the knowledge and experience to configure WD fantastically well.

~LDogg

 

[Pat MacKnife]

I wonder how it would do with Configure Defender at high settings

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Not good results .... please test New Norton thanks

I can't. No more trial available
can't make it to work
symantec maybe

EDIT:

https://malwaretips.com/threads/malware-samples-24.93439/post-822281

 

[Evjl's Rain]

I wonder how it would do with Configure Defender at high settings

it will be better but I don't expect it to block everything

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

it will be better but I don't expect it to block everything

Well to be fair, I think it's unrealistic to expect it to block everything, same goes for every product. Don't get me wrong, I love what you are doing and have zero issues with it, I think it's awesome you are back to testing,

This is not directed at you at all, but I just want to make light of the fact that if the exception is that WD, or any product that is tested on the HUB, needs to be perfect and infection free all the time, well I think that's a very unrealistic expectation. It's no different than someone saying that a product that got 98% on AV-Comparatives sucks. Since when did 98% become a failure, I would be happy to say that I got 98% on all my tests throughout school. From my understanding the HUB was never meant designed to pit products against each other and was never intended to be used as a way to choose a product. If one wants to look at tests to decided which product to use, that's fine, but one should look at all tests, not just specific ones with the assumption that test x is more important than test y. What I mean is, when you look at all their professional tests as a whole WD has definitely improved. Now I'm not saying they are more important than the HUB, I like what everyone that participates in the HUB is doing, but one cannot say that the HUB should be rated higher than the other ones, that's just cherry picking results. Every test will have pro's and con's, nothing is perfect, but one should look at all tests, not just one or 2.

For the record, I'm not here to make excuses for WD, the results are the results, but I just think there's an unrealistic expectation that products need to pretty much be infection free every time in order to be considered good. This isn't just about WD, it's about all products that are tested on the HUB. As I always say, no product is perfect, every product will miss things and to think otherwise is silly. There's a lot of great products out there, choose which ever one works best for you. At the end of the day if someone gets infected, it doesn't matter how well is scored on the HUB, or on any test for that matter, fact is the person still got infected.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

My purpose of testing all products is to find their weaknesses
Then, if the products are good enough, I can use 1 of them for myself or my friends and patch the weaknesses with some free tools

My concern is what AV I should install on PCs of average users when they ask me

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

My purpose of testing all products is to find their weaknesses
Then, if the products are good enough, I can use 1 of them for myself or my friends and patch the weaknesses with some free tools

My concern is what AV I should install on PCs of average users when they ask me

That's totally fair in my books and very understandable

Again, my post was never directed at you or what you are doing by any means, but rather the mentality that people have when it comes to test results of products (as a whole) and their unrealistic expectations of them. For me, I've always been an advocate of educating users on proper security habits 1st and then talk about security programs, but more often than not it's the other way around. They way I see it, if someone is concerned for average users who aren't techies/security geeks, than either lock down their system if the rely of Windows, or better yet, if they don't need Windows, switch them to Chrome OS, or another Linux variant. An example I just though of very recently is, if someone is constantly getting into car accidents because they go through stop signs/red lights and then they have someone that tells them, to avoid getting into a accident, they need buy a faster car. Instead of changing their driving habits and practicing good safe driving skills, they buy the faster car. So, they still practice unsafe driving, maybe getting into slightly less car accidents, but chances are they will still get into a car accident as the "faster car" won't prevent accidents every time.

 

[beavisviruses]

I can't. No more trial available
can't make it to work
symantec maybe

EDIT:

https://malwaretips.com/threads/malware-samples-24.93439/post-822281

is symantec for business not Norton Security and have better result than WD

 

[Evjl's Rain]

is symantec for business not Norton Security and have better result than WD

I can't test norton because I don't have any trial license. Perhaps someone else can or I will find another way to get trial license

 

[ForgottenSeer 67480]

How about testing free or paid Panda Dome? Panda is very light and i don't see eating RAM with Procesor.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

How about testing free or paid Panda Dome? Panda is very light and i don't see eating RAM with Procesor.

I tested panda free 1 week ago with old sample pack. Panda failed so badly. Extremely poor result
totally not recommended
panda paid is better thanks to application control

panda is only good against 1 week-old malwares but useless against 2-3 day-old malwares

 

[ForgottenSeer 67480]

Oh, what about Comodo IS Premium or Cloud Antivirus?

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Oh, what about Comodo IS Premium or Cloud Antivirus?

without the sandbox/container and HIPS, they are totally useless
sandbox and HIPS will block everything

 

[ForgottenSeer 67480]

without the sandbox/container and HIPS, they are totally useless
sandbox and HIPS will block everything

which free antivirus did the best job then?

 

[Evjl's Rain]

which free antivirus did the best job then?

1/ Kaspersky security cloud free or kaspersky free (cloud free has more customizations, can be tweaked for better speed)
2/ Avast/AVG free: only comparable to kaspersky after being tweaked for better security, performance and telemetry is blocked. After being fully tweaked, avast is even less vulnerable than kaspersky, no joke
3/ Comodo firewall or comodo cloud AV without antivirus module (because AV module weak): use cruelsister's tweak. Super light but very prone to false positives. Totally not recommended for novice users or users from non-English speaking countries
4/ Bitdefender free: personally, I dislike it although it does well. It has so many limitations and flaws

second tier:
- Windows Defender: we need extra knowledge to use it. Otherwise, we are prone to infection due to WD's vulnerabilities (where WD users can get infections when they shouldn't in ideal conditions)


Kaspersky is probably my first choice to recommend to others, verbally. Avast is my choice if I set up a PC myself

 

[cibin]

i tried my old threat data bases but it detcted and its of UI has been crashed while making action on it...

 

[beavisviruses]

1/ Kaspersky security cloud free or kaspersky free (cloud free has more customizations, can be tweaked for better speed)
2/ Avast/AVG free: only comparable to kaspersky after being tweaked for better security, performance and telemetry is blocked. After being fully tweaked, avast is even less vulnerable than kaspersky, no joke
3/ Comodo firewall or comodo cloud AV without antivirus module (because AV module weak): use cruelsister's tweak. Super light but very prone to false positives. Totally not recommended for novice users or users from non-English speaking countries
4/ Bitdefender free: personally, I dislike it although it does well. It has so many limitations and flaws

second tier:
- Windows Defender: we need extra knowledge to use it. Otherwise, we are prone to infection due to WD's vulnerabilities (where WD users can get infections when they shouldn't in ideal conditions)


Kaspersky is probably my first choice to recommend to others, verbally. Avast is my choice if I set up a PC myself

Avast better than kaspersky ? xD PLEASE .......

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Avast better than kaspersky ? xD PLEASE .......

I know what I'm talking about and verified by real test. Avast is not good in default settings (you must agree) but when you combine fully tweaked avast with syshardener, it is harder to penetrate
I've been playing around with avast for 5 years and kaspersky for 2 years
I know their strengths and weaknesses

Kaspersky default >> avast default
kapsersky tweaked > avast tweaked
kaspersky tweaked (free) + syshardener < avast tweaked + syshardener

syshardener patches avast's weaknesses while it cannot fully patch kaspersky's. Kaspersky's cons are harder to solve