Untrustworthy AV review site posts bad review of MSE

E

evilsofa

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
10,078
There's a new round of bad press for Microsoft Security Essentials, in which it is claimed that MSE missed 39% of malware thrown at it:

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/securit...ssentials-misses-39-of-malware-in-dennis-test

However, this review comes from Dennis Publishing, who seems to have financial reasons to be heavily favorable to Symantec products. Early this year, it was found that another of their tests in which MSE performed poorly and Norton performed extremely well had questionable paramaters:

http://www.geek.com/microsoft/micro...-strikes-out-on-questionable-av-test-1538990/
 
MSE has worked great for me since its inception. At least MSE has kept to its simplistic interface and knows what it is and what it isn't. It was never meant to compete with the other AV's. It just so happened that when it first released it was a kick ass product. It was meant to give every basic Windows user a readily available solution to help protect their system.

I don't need something that can catch 99% of the 20,000 new viruses/malware signatures that pop up every damn year. I'm not an Internet whore so much that I bang every shady website, or doesn't understand what he downloads. It isn't rocket science. Plus, all the cool kids are imaging their machine these days.

They can all blow me, especially Norton who's probably blowing McAfee. Never forget the 90's!
 
/usr/home said:
Symantec can blow me. That is all.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

I've had the...um..."pleasure" of working with Symantec. Both in small and large environments. It's shit. Garbage. The administrative tools are horrible, and the client his resource heavy ( prompting elevated user complaints ).

The bottom line is to choose anything BUT Symantec.
 
I'm glad we are finally phasing out SEP for SCCM Endpoint.

AV really is our last line of defence and very rarely do we get hits due to strict GPOs and good filtering and keeping up to date software. I'd say we see a hit a month and then it's usually always a cookie. I don't remember the last time we had an actual infection.
 
Honestly I don't trust AVs in general to protect me 100%. With the whole NSA stuff going on how do we know all AV companies are not forced to NOT detect certain viruses, such as NSA written ones? It sounds a bit tin foil hat, but think about it, it's a possibility. Not saying you should not go with no AV, but you also should not assume you are 100% secure no matter what AV you use.
 
Red Squirrel said:
It sounds a bit tin foil hat, .
Click to expand...

If you've kept up with even a fraction of the Snowden leaks then there is absolutely nothing tinfoil hat-ish you could possibly think up involving the NSA and what they can/want to do.
 
Symantec and McAfee products are absolute shit. So much for the biased Dennis tests.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top