Windows defender???

[Hefaistos22]

I use for now Spybot with TeaTimer,but i was wondering,how about WindowsDefender?is it still bad in detection?or the database is now better?cause i dont know which of them i should use??? ???

[solcroft]

It shares ad/spyware databases with OneCare, and OneCare has been demonstrating tremendous improvement lately. No idea how it stacks against Spybot though, simply because I have no idea about Spybot's performance.

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "I use for now Spybot with TeaTimer,but i was wondering,how about WindowsDefender?is it still bad in detection?or the database is now better?cause i dont know which of them i should use??? ???" }-

The TeaTimer feature of Spybot S&D provides some registry protection and that's all, so you could use Windows Defender with Spybot IMO. I can't comment on the current effectiveness of WD, but it has seemed useless to me in the past. I would recommend Spyware Terminator or Spyware Doctor SE (Google pack) if you want freeware with a real time shield.

[Huupi]

Don't overlook the king of them all : SUPERANTISPYWARE !! :D

[lucas1985]

-{ Quote: "It shares ad/spyware databases with OneCare" }-
Can you confirm this?

[Trespasser]

The only time I hear from Windows Defender is when an install wants to hook an auto start. Other than that...you wouldn't know it was there. Don't know if that's good or bad. :-\ . But running Sandboxie might explain that, though.

Later...

[ErikAlbert]

I finally managed to install Windows Defender.
What a painful installation and what an ugly scanner. ::)

Full system scan results :
No unwanted or harmful software detected.
Your computer is running normally
Time elapsed : 00:25:49
Objects scanned : 335336

Almost 26 minuts to tell me I'm clean. This is way too long. I'm used to be clean in 2 minuts.
One plus point : no false positives.

[bman412]

-{ Quote: "I finally managed to install Windows Defender.
What a painful installation and what an ugly scanner. ::)

Full system scan results :
No unwanted or harmful software detected.
Your computer is running normally
Time elapsed : 00:25:49
Objects scanned : 335336

Almost 26 minuts to tell me I'm clean. This is way too long. I'm used to be clean in 2 minuts." }-

Two minutes for a full scan? Might I ask which scanner can do that?

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Two minutes for a full scan? Might I ask which scanner can do that?" }-
I'm a FirstDefense-ISR-user, but this software is terminated and not available anymore, except the expensive server version.

I replace my system partition with a clean one during each reboot based on a pristine installation.
I don't use any scanners anymore, but sometimes I like to check my approach with any existing scanner and today it was Windows Defender.

[lordpake]

No app can perform FULL system scan in just 2 mins. Memory scan of running applications + registry check maybe, but not a FULL scan.

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "No app can perform FULL system scan in just 2 mins. Memory scan of running applications + registry check maybe, but not a FULL scan." }-
Well, I don't need to defend myself. I only see the results on my computer.
I live already more than 6 months without any scanner and I ran most popular scanners already on my system partition and nothing was detected.
As I said in my previous post, I replace my system partition with a CLEAN system partition during EACH REBOOT and my reboot takes 2 minuts from desktop to desktop.
That's why all these scanners can't find anything because there is nothing to find on a CLEAN system partition.
Sometimes these scanners find a false positive, like ShadowProtect but I'm 100% sure, that ShadowProtect is not malware.
Next time I will try OneCare, but I know already in advance that this scanner won't find anything either, just like all the others, including all AV-comparative scanners.

[Jadda]

Since we are on the subject, I think it wierd that Microsoft haven't released any major updates to the program. It is still in version 1.1. OneCare has been released as version 2 some time ago, but Windows Defender are not.

I want some updates with big improvements.

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Since we are on the subject, I think it wierd that Microsoft haven't released any major updates to the program. It is still in version 1.1. OneCare has been released as version 2 some time ago, but Windows Defender are not.

I want some updates with big improvements." }-
Microsoft's security has no structure at all, it's just a random collection of security softwares and tools without a plan.

[Perman]

-{ Quote: "Since we are on the subject, I think it wierd that Microsoft haven't released any major updates to the program. It is still in version 1.1. OneCare has been released as version 2 some time ago, but Windows Defender are not.

I want some updates with big improvements." }-


Hi,

Is window defender free and OneCare a paid ware ?

If that is true to the teeth, then ;D You know what that means. ;)

[Huupi]

-{ Quote: "Microsoft's security has no structure at all, it's just a random collection of security softwares and tools without a plan." }-

i agree with Albert,with each monthly update from MS it install the malicious software removal tool but i never noticed it even works,also nothing to find in the logs. ???

[mercurie]

I have this on both my machines.

It is free and is real time, what on earth is there to complain about. Near as I can tell it uses not much resources. I have not had it long better add that. :-\

No spyware protections come up with malware of significance on my machines again whats there to complain about. It is to MS advantage to offer this. It is not different in that area then AVG offer a free version or Avast free offering.

As for how good, someone else will need to answer that, but none of the Antispywares come up with anything so this is not a good test.

Are there any tests for Win. Defend??

By the way it takes about 12 mins or so to do a scan on my machines

[midway40]

WLOC versions 1.x used WinDefender as a separate process. Since 2.0 was released however an enhanced version of WinDefender was incorporated into the OC's antivirus engine. When WLOC is installed it disables WD.

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "
It is free and is real time, what on earth is there to complain about. Near as I can tell it uses not much resources. As for how good, someone else will need to answer that, but none of the Antispywares come up with anything... " }-

Well, I don't think anyone complains about the fact that it is free and offers a real time shield. I would also like to see it evaluated along side other antispyware applications in a recent test. I have come to think of it as useless because it has never found anything on any system I've used, nor have I heard it being effective for anyone else, but I realize this is anecdotal.

[solcroft]

-{ Quote: "Can you confirm this?" }-
It's consistent with every sample I've seen so far. I'm assuming VirusTotal uses OneCare's engine.

[bellgamin]

-{ Quote: "I live already more than 6 months without any scanner and I ran most popular scanners already on my system partition and nothing was detected.
As I said in my previous post, I replace my system partition with a CLEAN system partition during EACH REBOOT and my reboot takes 2 minuts from desktop to desktop.
That's why all these scanners can't find anything because there is nothing to find on a CLEAN system partition.
Sometimes these scanners find a false positive, like ShadowProtect but I'm 100% sure, that ShadowProtect is not malware.
Next time I will try OneCare, but I know already in advance that this scanner won't find anything either, just like all the others, including all AV-comparative scanners." }-This is waaay off-thread. I check in to read about WD & instead find EA's perennial posts about FDISR & frozen snapshots.

OTOH, solcroft's findings re OneCare's inclusion of WD's sigs are surprising & helpful. Thanks

[solcroft]

-{ Quote: "OTOH, solcroft's findings re OneCare's inclusion of WD's sigs are surprising & helpful. Thanks" }-
It's probably the other way round.

I read once on a Microsoft blog that the same malware research team develops the signatures used for all the company's blacklist scanner products (OneCare, Defender, MSRT etc). Can't seem to find that blog again now, though.

[midway40]

Could have it been from here (http://blogs.technet.com/antimalware/)?

Anyway it implies what you said in the header "This blog provides information about what's happening in the anti-malware technology team at Microsoft. We're the team that builds the core antivirus, antispyware, anti-rootkit, and related technology, which is then used across a number of Microsoft products and technologies."

[EASTER]

-{ Quote: "Microsoft's security has no structure at all, it's just a random collection of security softwares and tools without a plan." }-

This is the most true and factual statement.

Microsoft is not in the business of Security, just manufacturing Operating Systems with a skeleton framework chalked full of files and extensions, and which are capable to be changed at will either maliciously or for productive usage.

Even if Microsoft could buy out Symantec, they still would have no better security than that customers experience now, and have for many years.

Thats why i don't trust even many of the security updates from $M, because even some of those have been re-exploited easily, and where not, it's but a simple matter for the more intelligent & digilent programmer to just switch to another of the thousands of loopholes that are fully exposed in their O/S's.

They are in the business of providing a PLATFORM from which others can add to. I think that should be very obvious by now.

Besides, with so many "FREE" exceptional security products circulating about now like never before, as well as their lead commercial offers, why would a $M O/S customer want to regress backwards and place their system at risk like that.

I say WinDefender is just another plain old gimmick and can offer neither trustworthy security nor protections that are required in the face of today's threats.

[solcroft]

-{ Quote: "This is the most true and factual statement." }-
According to you. And I think it's public knowledge how much your opinion is worth.

[EASTER]

-{ Quote: "According to you. And I think it's public knowledge how much your opinion is worth." }-

Never mind my opinion Mr Critic 8)

The results speak for themselves. It's nice to know you have the corner on the value of opposing opinions though, so have fun. ;D

[solcroft]

-{ Quote: "The results speak for themselves." }-
Despite the claims of the bashers, they do indeed.

[EASTER]

-{ Quote: "Despite the claims of the bashers, they do indeed." }-

I can't quite bring myself to subscribe to consistent track records of any product so much as bashing as pure disappointment.

It's painfully obvious for many that Windows Defender falls immediately into such a category, but as one who tries to give the benefit of the doubt that subsequent changes can eventually turn around as reliable improvements from their predeccesors, users always like to hope for the best.

In $M case though, it goes totally against the grain for reasons already stated, and if not nearly enough, theres now Windows Vista.

[solcroft]

-{ Quote: "I can't quite bring myself to subscribe to consistent track records of any product so much as bashing as pure disappointment." }-
How to spot a Microsoft basher: writes "MS" as "M$".

'Nuff said. :shifty:

[EASTER]

Inaccurate assessment unfortunately.

A so-called Microsoft basher as you seem to make something of a reference to, simply doesn't use Microsoft products at all ;D
And thus proceeds to downgrade everything & everything supporting & originating from that camp.

Solcroft, you could adjust your perspective to a more conventional means i think.

Such as since this is an obvious diversion from the Topic, i'm compelled to balance your total misconception but only briefly in all fairness to the author.

I just happen to take great interest in M$/MS as an Operating System of choice but it's also important to draw conclusive lines of distinction where they do happen to exist to better inform the public.

Without repeating it again, i'll reiterate for clarity, don't expect Microsoft to offer it's Operating Systems any full security of substance, ok? Because if that was their objective, then they wouldn't be in the position they enjoy today with the THOUSANDS of supporting security entities that shore up their O/S's limitations.

It's a WISE business policy you're not likely to ever see change in case you had your hopes set on that.

Enuff Said 8)

[solcroft]

Well, here we have a wannabe cheerleader singing the praises of security products at every opportunity, but whenever those security products fail against an exploit or attack, the true reason is never explored, with the tune never failing to instead shift dramatically to a fine oratory regarding the flaws and weaknesses of "M$"'s operating systems.

I don't expect full security from MS or any other, but as far as I'm concerned, I'm sick of wannabes who prance about spouting baseless hype, who have little idea of what they're talking about and even less of what they're doing, putting all their efforts instead into acting like they do. Time to find out where the "Ignore" button is...

[EASTER]

This constant incitement also leaves a lot to be desired.

Don't be a bit surprised when the Moderators finally read this and pull the totally Off-Topic ~snipped~ remarks

...as you seem severly disappointed when challenged

[solcroft]

-{ Quote: "Don't be a bit surprised when the Moderators finally read this and pull the totally Off-Topic ~snipped~ remarks

...as you seem severly disappointed when challenged" }-
I wouldn't be surprised to be modded for this. But constant, pointless product cheerleading and bashing are nothing but a waste of forum bandwidth, and I think it's about time someone said that.

[LowWaterMark]

So much for a Windows Defender topic.

Listen, there are pieces of truth on both sides of these back and forth arguments, which we seem to be having a lot of lately. Posts that have too much of a personal focus on them, (i.e. comments that are too easily taken as rude, hurtful or sarcastic), only lead to anger, additional bashing replies and disruption. Likewise, ill founded conclusions that aren't backed up by sufficient factual information, can lead to frustration, disbelief and even lack of interest in pursuing any intelligent discussion.

How about if everyone tries to: 1. speak from factual knowledge; 2. stick to the actual topic of a thread; and 3. "be nice" (or at least be civil) to one another. It shouldn't get personal. It's only "computer security" talk, after all. Not life or death.