- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,593
If this is a stupid question, then I am stupid too.
See the Lockdown, Evjl's Rain and my posts about WD (free AV) cons. Some things are probably known only to AI that makes the final decision.
Last edited:
Windows Defender - Pro's and Con's
- Thread starter jackuars
- Start date
Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.
See the Lockdown, Evjl's Rain and my posts about WD (free AV) cons. Some things are probably known only to AI that makes the final decision.
Avast Free and Malwarebytes Free.
Why ?
Because it was recommended to them and it's free.
Everywhere I go, one thing I can count on... is to find Avast Free and Malwarebytes Free.
/s
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,593
Be careful. Some MT readers can overlook a hidden joke.
Anyway, I used this setup some years ago. It was OK.
I still use Avast and Malwarebytes Free here on most systems? is it not a good thing? Trying out Defender and Malwarebytes Free on main Desktop, just hoping it's same protection as I had with Avast for last 10 or more years, and not worst protection
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,298
I have put Windows 10 Pro on my desktop to replace Windows 7 Enterprise. Setup is simple, hardening through GPO, UAC denies elevation of unsigned, risky commands are disabled except PowerShell through WD Exploit Protection (WD EP). Office is hardened though GPO and WD EP using Andy;s excellent Configure Defender, Protected Folders is on and SRP default deny implemented.
Nice thing of WD that it reports from time to time what it has done: I am proud to announce that the PC officially was infected. Notice the sneaky location (browser cache). Does someone know whether it is possible to see whether WD found it during on demand disk access (write) or on execution? Would be interesting to know whether it was executed (meaning it had escaped Chrome sandbox).
On the 29th I ran with Chromium stable V71 (I updated to V72 Yesterday). I remember on the 29th in the morning I was collecting information for a blog (of a customer for which I am ghostwriter) and I had to enable scripts for HTTP://* websites (which I have disabled by default in Chrome content settings) to view the content. Chrome Safe browsing and BitDefender Traffic Light did not throw a warning
Nice thing of WD that it reports from time to time what it has done: I am proud to announce that the PC officially was infected
. Notice the sneaky location (browser cache). Does someone know whether it is possible to see whether WD found it during on demand disk access (write) or on execution? Would be interesting to know whether it was executed (meaning it had escaped Chrome sandbox).On the 29th I ran with Chromium stable V71 (I updated to V72 Yesterday). I remember on the 29th in the morning I was collecting information for a blog (of a customer for which I am ghostwriter) and I had to enable scripts for HTTP://* websites (which I have disabled by default in Chrome content settings) to view the content. Chrome Safe browsing and BitDefender Traffic Light did not throw a warning
- Dec 15, 2018
- 158
Yeah, sounds "simple".I have put Windows 10 Pro on my desktop to replace Windows 7 Enterprise. Setup is simple, hardening through GPO, UAC denies elevation of unsigned, risky commands are disabled except PowerShell through WD Exploit Protection (WD EP). Office is hardened though GPO and WD EP using Andy;s excellent Configure Defender, Protected Folders is on and SRP default deny implemented.
Nice thing of WD that it reports from time to time what it has done: I am proud to announce that the PC officially was infected
On the 29th I ran with Chromium stable V71 (I updated to V72 Yesterday). I remember on the 29th in the morning I was collecting information for a blog (of a customer for which I am ghostwriter) and I had to enable scripts for HTTP://* websites (which I have disabled by default in Chrome content settings) to view the content. Chrome Safe browsing and BitDefender Traffic Light did not throw a warning
View attachment 207614
- May 13, 2017
- 2,685
That is pretty much, what comes to my mind, whenever someone mentions WD, that makes me hard to recommend it. It either works or not.
WD is outstanding, when it comes to the detection, though not perfect, but the problem are bugs. It is made by hundreds of people all over the world. Literally: the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing - causing various issues, sometimes too serious. It is just made on the go.
- Jul 3, 2015
- 8,153
If your computer is infected then there is no hope for the rest of us. Sounds like an FP to me. Yesterday when I installed ReHIPS, and it made an isolated environment for Chrome (this entails copying some files from Appdata) Windows Defender told me that it wants to upload something for inspection. I repeated the process of installing ReHIPS, and Windows Defender repeated the inspection of my Chrome data.I have put Windows 10 Pro on my desktop to replace Windows 7 Enterprise. Setup is simple, hardening through GPO, UAC denies elevation of unsigned, risky commands are disabled except PowerShell through WD Exploit Protection (WD EP). Office is hardened though GPO and WD EP using Andy;s excellent Configure Defender, Protected Folders is on and SRP default deny implemented.
Nice thing of WD that it reports from time to time what it has done: I am proud to announce that the PC officially was infected
On the 29th I ran with Chromium stable V71 (I updated to V72 Yesterday). I remember on the 29th in the morning I was collecting information for a blog (of a customer for which I am ghostwriter) and I had to enable scripts for HTTP://* websites (which I have disabled by default in Chrome content settings) to view the content. Chrome Safe browsing and BitDefender Traffic Light did not throw a warning
View attachment 207614
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,593
Hmm! So, you cannot recommend any AV (they have more issues than WD).
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,593
By the way, it is possible for advanced users to adopt no-AV setup, based on SmartScreen + default-deny (SRP and Windows policies) + process monitoring (drivers, script engines, and not whitelisted applications).
The process monitoring, including the kernel drivers, can be easily adopted on every Windows 10 machine via applying WD Application Control (SIPolicy.p7b file):
Discuss - Application Control on Windows 10 Home
Sorry - my post seems to be a counterpart of the topic.:emoji_innocent:
The process monitoring, including the kernel drivers, can be easily adopted on every Windows 10 machine via applying WD Application Control (SIPolicy.p7b file):
Discuss - Application Control on Windows 10 Home
Sorry - my post seems to be a counterpart of the topic.:emoji_innocent:
Last edited:
Similar threads
