Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
Windows Defender vs Top 200 Ransomware (PC Security Channel)
Message
<blockquote data-quote="bazang" data-source="post: 1117368" data-attributes="member: 114717"><p>Leo is not a professional tester. As he has stated publicly he has no interest in performing tests that others find acceptable. His position is that his demonstrations prove whatever point that he is making.</p><p></p><p>He is correct in that Defender has one of the weakest behavioral detection capabilities.</p><p></p><p>However, he also never discusses that Microsoft - unlike other security software publishers - provides a full-stack of defense-in-depth security features. Why does he not discuss this? I already know from talking to him. His view and testing is from the standpoint of a n00b who knows nothing about security with Defender at 100% default settings on Windows Home.</p><p></p><p>As we all know, Microsoft built Windows for enterprises, governments and other institutional type organizations where the endpoints are managed. Microsoft only offers Windows for Home (and therefore default Defender) as it does not want to develop a home-user specific version with better security.</p><p></p><p>To Microsoft's credit has tried to better protect consumers many times. When it did offer a great improvement in home user security using S Mode, most every "user that wants to use stuff" complained.</p><p></p><p>You always default to "Most MT members...understand" and I get that, but with utmost respect I disagree. This forum is a public one and for every regular MT member there are probably 100 lurkers. So one cannot justify the interpretations of others based upon them being an MT member alone.</p><p></p><p>Leo, and most people who are unbiased and honest, know that Defender in its default configuration on Windows Home is not enough. It is not very good insurance even for those who are careful with their online and system usage. Absolutely not good enough for a household with children or other negligent, prolific downloaders. As you point out, Microsoft recommends that certain other features be enhanced so that default Windows provides better protections. It is buried infos that most home users will never look for nor find if they have the inclination to look for it.</p><p></p><p>My own personal observations of years of testing is that all AV are weak with lots of limitations. They all need "compensating controls" which are unpopular or unacceptable to "users that want to use stuff." I think those people are fundamentally the problem. Until those people get "fixed" by taking away their ability to do what they want, nothing will ever change.</p><p></p><p>It is also astonishing that people invest so much of themselves both mentally and emotionally in products (<strong><em>fanbois</em></strong>). Any person with common sense understands that they cannot trust any software or digital system, no matter what software is used or how it is configured. They should have zero personal investment in any software or configuration. But that is not how people are. Instead they get upset because someone shows a thing or two about a product, and they don't agree with the review. This is one of the most common social media diseases. It infects the masses across the entire digital space.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="bazang, post: 1117368, member: 114717"] Leo is not a professional tester. As he has stated publicly he has no interest in performing tests that others find acceptable. His position is that his demonstrations prove whatever point that he is making. He is correct in that Defender has one of the weakest behavioral detection capabilities. However, he also never discusses that Microsoft - unlike other security software publishers - provides a full-stack of defense-in-depth security features. Why does he not discuss this? I already know from talking to him. His view and testing is from the standpoint of a n00b who knows nothing about security with Defender at 100% default settings on Windows Home. As we all know, Microsoft built Windows for enterprises, governments and other institutional type organizations where the endpoints are managed. Microsoft only offers Windows for Home (and therefore default Defender) as it does not want to develop a home-user specific version with better security. To Microsoft's credit has tried to better protect consumers many times. When it did offer a great improvement in home user security using S Mode, most every "user that wants to use stuff" complained. You always default to "Most MT members...understand" and I get that, but with utmost respect I disagree. This forum is a public one and for every regular MT member there are probably 100 lurkers. So one cannot justify the interpretations of others based upon them being an MT member alone. Leo, and most people who are unbiased and honest, know that Defender in its default configuration on Windows Home is not enough. It is not very good insurance even for those who are careful with their online and system usage. Absolutely not good enough for a household with children or other negligent, prolific downloaders. As you point out, Microsoft recommends that certain other features be enhanced so that default Windows provides better protections. It is buried infos that most home users will never look for nor find if they have the inclination to look for it. My own personal observations of years of testing is that all AV are weak with lots of limitations. They all need "compensating controls" which are unpopular or unacceptable to "users that want to use stuff." I think those people are fundamentally the problem. Until those people get "fixed" by taking away their ability to do what they want, nothing will ever change. It is also astonishing that people invest so much of themselves both mentally and emotionally in products ([B][I]fanbois[/I][/B]). Any person with common sense understands that they cannot trust any software or digital system, no matter what software is used or how it is configured. They should have zero personal investment in any software or configuration. But that is not how people are. Instead they get upset because someone shows a thing or two about a product, and they don't agree with the review. This is one of the most common social media diseases. It infects the masses across the entire digital space. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top
