Microsoft Security Tool Fails Malware Detection Test

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
This isn't very encouraging. :eek:

Overall, 11 products were tested, and six of them – Bitdefender, F-Secure, Trend Micro, Symantec, and two offerings from Kaspersky – achieved a 100% detection rate. The rest did no worse than 95%, with one exception: Microsoft Security Essentials detected only 73% on the real-world testing and 87% of the malware on the real-time test.
Click to expand...
 
It sucks that MS has let MSE go downhill so bad. I remember years ago when it was just about the best thing on the market, but now even MS doesn't recommend you use it as your primary AV. It's like they got sick of maintaining it, so they just let it go to hell so everyone would quit using it.
 
I didn't realize MSE was still available. I thought they discontinued it a few years ago.
 
DPI said:
Assuming you're not joking, when exactly was it the 'best thing on the market'?
Click to expand...

I think he's referring to GIANT which MS bought to spin into Windows Defender / SE. At one point, GIANT was rated pretty highly.
 
I understand Microsoft wants to provide basic protection, you know, stuff not too good that causes antitrust lawsuits for including AV.

However, their commercial AV product, System Center Endpoint Protection, uses the same engine and definitions; and System Center is not cheap. What we are stuck with is a low grade enterprise antivirus solution.
 
I still use it for one of the initial scans on a infected drive ( I use four others) and it still digs out a lot of stuff. Even stuff MBAM and others don't find.

I've even found I re-scanned a HDD after MBAM had said it had cleaned it up only to find it found it all again in the exact same locations.

Can't trust any of them completely.
 
Steve said:
This isn't very encouraging. :eek:
Click to expand...

The last three Optional King MS Up-Dates they wanted me to install on my computer didn't even tell me what they were for, or what they would, or would not, do to my computer, when I clicked on the "More Info" link either, so it is getting to the point that you would have to be Supper Dumb, and Stupid, to believe any thing that King MS tells you to allow them to do to your computer, except maybe "Up-Grade" to Windows 10, the Cloud, or whatever else they are soon, if not now, going to force you to rent/lease, or otherwise pay King MS more money to use, making them even richer, more Arrogant, and Slip-Shod, than they are now!
 
Old Paul said:
The last three Optional King MS Up-Dates they wanted me to install on my computer didn't even tell me what they were for, or what they would, or would not, do to my computer, when I clicked on the "More Info" link either, so it is getting to the point that you would have to be Supper Dumb, and Stupid, to believe any thing that King MS tells you to allow them to do to your computer, except maybe "Up-Grade" to Windows 10, the Cloud, or whatever else they are soon, if not now, going to force you to rent/lease, or otherwise pay King MS more money to use, making them even richer, more Arrogant, and Slip-Shod, than they are now!
Click to expand...

Repeat in english please.
 
Old Paul said:
The last three Optional King MS Up-Dates they wanted me to install on my computer didn't even tell me what they were for, or what they would, or would not, do to my computer, when I clicked on the "More Info" link either, so it is getting to the point that you would have to be Supper Dumb, and Stupid, to believe any thing that King MS tells you to allow them to do to your computer, except maybe "Up-Grade" to Windows 10, the Cloud, or whatever else they are soon, if not now, going to force you to rent/lease, or otherwise pay King MS more money to use, making them even richer, more Arrogant, and Slip-Shod, than they are now!
Click to expand...

tumblr_lfnmtgGVxA1qc7e4q.jpg
 
AV Test's most recent experiment pitted 30,000 known samples of malware against Windows 7 AV programs. It focused on Windows 7 due to its ubiquity; it has about 60% global market share, as XP withers away and Windows 8 fails to gain ground.

This was not a test of commercial antivirus products you find in stores. It was a test of enterprise endpoint security products used in businesses.
Click to expand...

I think that blurb is important. I'd like to see how the cheap (consumer) AV programs from these popular companies compare to the enterprise variant.
 
DPI said:
Assuming you're not joking, when exactly was it the 'best thing on the market'?
Click to expand...

I don't remember when exactly it was, but if avcomparative has old reports, I'd look at 2007-2010. There was definitely a time when it was a solid performer...but it was a long time ago.
 
nilepez said:
I don't remember when exactly it was, but if avcomparative has old reports, I'd look at 2007-2010. There was definitely a time when it was a solid performer...but it was a long time ago.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I remember it did really well in tests early on.

Microsoft always pulls this shit. They'll develop something and put sime effort into it, then let it wither and die. Look at Windows Media Center, or the various media creation tools that were bundled with Vista.

In this case I imagine antivirus cartel money played a significant role. They probably only released MSE to force them to fix their shitty products. Its ridiculous that I have to buy additional software just for basic OS security.
 
I wonder if the other anti-virus software companies complained that MSE was too good and free intially. There was a time where it was really good and not invasive. I could imagine how much other companies didn't like that. They let MSE become crap for a reason I bet.
 
B2BigAl said:
It sucks that MS has let MSE go downhill so bad. I remember years ago when it was just about the best thing on the market, but now even MS doesn't recommend you use it as your primary AV. It's like they got sick of maintaining it, so they just let it go to hell so everyone would quit using it.
Click to expand...

No one talks about MSE in the linked article.
 
NeoGohan said:
I wonder if the other anti-virus software companies complained that MSE was too good and free intially. There was a time where it was really good and not invasive. I could imagine how much other companies didn't like that. They let MSE become crap for a reason I bet.
Click to expand...

LOL
 
Well the bad press for MSE didn't really start till it was bundled in with Windows 8. Up till then it scored pretty well.

Co-incidence?

Who pays for these tests anyway?
 
One would think that a company that build an OS would be the best at making a great anti virus software. Then on the other hand they build win 8 so....
 
nilepez said:
I don't remember when exactly it was, but if avcomparative has old reports, I'd look at 2007-2010. There was definitely a time when it was a solid performer...but it was a long time ago.
Click to expand...

Didn't they announce that they aren't going to support it anymore or something like that, a couple of years back? I thought I read that somewhere... so this doesn't surprise me. Sucks, but expected, I guess.
 
pothb said:
Didn't they announce that they aren't going to support it anymore or something like that, a couple of years back? I thought I read that somewhere... so this doesn't surprise me. Sucks, but expected, I guess.
Click to expand...

Where did you read that? I'd be really surprised if they were doing to drop support for it since MSE is bundled with Windows 8 and 8.1 with no sign of that changing during the move to Win10.

What you're probably seeing is variation between testing methods that underscore the low points of MSE that other AV tests didn't uncover in the past because the testing methods were different along with some changes that are prolly due to the on-going differences in how exploits continue to evolve versus the effectiveness of security countermeasures. Those things are in a constant state of flux so what applies today in one test might be pretty meaningless in a matter of a few days or months. These kinds of comparison articles are totally stuff you should take with a few grains of salt rather than basing your worldview of AV on the outcome for the next few years. ;)
 
MSE was made to salvage Netbooks. Since netbooks are network oriented they are highly vulnerable but they couldn't support a Norton to Macafee at the time so MS did MSE as a very lightweight useful anti-virus. You think with all those low end tablets, they'd keep it going.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Where did you read that? I'd be really surprised if they were doing to drop support for it since MSE is bundled with Windows 8 and 8.1 with no sign of that changing during the move to Win10.

What you're probably seeing is variation between testing methods that underscore the low points of MSE that other AV tests didn't uncover in the past because the testing methods were different along with some changes that are prolly due to the on-going differences in how exploits continue to evolve versus the effectiveness of security countermeasures. Those things are in a constant state of flux so what applies today in one test might be pretty meaningless in a matter of a few days or months. These kinds of comparison articles are totally stuff you should take with a few grains of salt rather than basing your worldview of AV on the outcome for the next few years. ;)
Click to expand...

No wait, I'm wrong. It looks like Windows Defender took over in 8 and beyond and now includes AV type functionality. I dunno if that's using work done for Security Essentials, but it seems like the two should have some sort of overlap, but I can see why MS would wanna abandon MSE if support for it doesn't go past 7 since they're trying to move existing systems off 7 and onto 10.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
No wait, I'm wrong. It looks like Windows Defender took over in 8 and beyond and now includes AV type functionality. I dunno if that's using work done for Security Essentials, but it seems like the two should have some sort of overlap, but I can see why MS would wanna abandon MSE if support for it doesn't go past 7 since they're trying to move existing systems off 7 and onto 10.
Click to expand...

Security Essentials was rebranded Windows Defender in Windows 8. It's the exact same thing.
 
NeoGohan said:
I wonder if the other anti-virus software companies complained that MSE was too good and free intially. There was a time where it was really good and not invasive. I could imagine how much other companies didn't like that. They let MSE become crap for a reason I bet.
Click to expand...

My guess is that they determined not enough people used it to justify the cost of maintenance, especially since most people probably used 3rd party A/V S/W.

Honestly, until last year, I could get a 3 user license for Norton's from Fry's for free after rebate.
 
Thanks for the info.

I've been using various anti-virus but then eventually just stopped bothering after the last reformat and was running MSE only.

Had BitDefender for a few weeks which I was happy with but it started causing my computer to BSOD and some of the suggested fixes didn't work.
 
I know everyone likes to hate on Microsoft, but I wonder about "tests" like these. Is Microsoft Security essentials that bad? I know it's all anecdotal evidence, but none of my friends or family have had any virus/malware problems since moving to it.

Sometimes I think some of these paid antivirus solutions identify threats to make it appear like they are doing something for your money.
 
ipeefreely said:
Win 8/8.1 Defender has "Enhanced protection against rootkits and bootkits" which Win XP/7 WSE doesn't have.
Click to expand...

You're taking my phrasing too literally. The point is that what is called Microsoft Security Essentials in Windows 7 is called Windows Defender in Windows 8, a rename that most people have missed.
 
reaper12 said:
I know everyone likes to hate on Microsoft, but I wonder about "tests" like these. Is Microsoft Security essentials that bad? I know it's all anecdotal evidence, but none of my friends or family have had any virus/malware problems since moving to it.

Sometimes I think some of these paid antivirus solutions identify threats to make it appear like they are doing something for your money.
Click to expand...

That's because they have Virus' and the product doesn't even know :D

Seriously, there's junk like that all over... MULTIPLE LAYERS help identify this stuff. Home users don't have a chance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top