Windows Defender Is Becoming the Powerful Antivirus That Windows 10 Needs

I also agree with previous posts. But it doesn't take away that I really appreciate that there are people who alerting us to the (often theoretical?) weak points of security software. It's one of the reasons I like to visit this (and other) forum(s) and follow the (sometimes heated) discussions.

 

Man that sound familiar-lol.

 

If I used Configure Defender and set it to high, then switched to another AV and went back to Defender, do I have to reset it back to high? Or should it still be there when it goes back to Defender?

 

Your settings should be remembered.

 

Your settings remain untouched. Only changes to Defender settings in Windows Security are reflected in CD, e.g. enable/disable Controlled Folder Access. Otherwise, Defender doesn't mess with CD settings.

 

Just remember that backups don't prevent data theft.

 

True, but that's irrelevant to the situation when your security solution has already failed you at that point. You're not restoring a backup until something has already gone horribly wrong. A good point in any case but most data theft will be the end result of the user doing something stupid. Backups are just a return to a working state. I don't trust a security solution that failed to clean up the mess it allowed in the first place. I'm not trying to argue your point in any way, you're right. I just don't want people to get lazy about backups because they think they have it covered some other way. Trust nothing on your machine if you have been infected.

 

Data theft is never irrelevant, and doesn't necessarily involve doing something stupid.

 

And as some data stealers are extremely stealthy, I wonder how many of those stating they have never been infected have always been infected?

 

I have seen this argument a million times and it is irrelevant to the efficacy of the backup. If your data is stolen then usually there is a reason for it such as incompetent operators and/or bad security setups.

 

You are saying we cannot know reality necessarily (our computers are infected) and that statement you have made logically makes your statement an illogical/fallacious argument. If we cannot know something- you can't either.

 

It was just a question from cruelsister, not a statement.

 

No illogicality: cruelsister says that many not competent users can be infected without knowing; but the ways to know if a computer is infected exist.

 

I'm not arguing that backups aren't necessary. What I'm saying is that backups don't prevent data theft.

 

I also didn't say data theft was irrelevant. I said it was irrelevant to backups. Which it is, they have nothing to do with each other. So what is to be done about data theft? As this is a Windows Defender discussion I feel compelled to bring it up, but I don't think that will be the tool to get the job done. So in the end if you are using Defender it should be supplemented with a backup solution, and probably some solution to prevent data theft.

 

But this isn't a surprise right? All AV's will at some point fail to block malware samples, as is seen in many AV tests. Of course I'm not happy about it either, so that's why I always use extra protection tools in case AV fails. I have also seen a video on YouTube where Malwarebytes was simply disabled by ransomware.

I know what you mean, but when I don't loose any data and money, I consider my machine not to be infected. I guess most people think this way.

Yes exactly, that's what people sometimes seem to be forgetting, it doesn't prevent data stealers from stealing files and perhaps even passwords and cookies, so that's why 2FA is very important.

 

So what? Please tell us how many times have you been a victim of data theft? I have been a member of this security forum since 2005, and no one has ever posted a security breach involving data theft. You know why? The majority of us are not worth the attention of 'professional' hackers, we are not rich enough so to speak to warrant that kind of attack. Your statement is in principle true, but in practice highly unlikely, case in point there would not be so many ransomware instances if stealing data was a remunerative silent operation. Besides it is absolutely foolish to keep sensitive data in a computer...

 

I have been a victim of data theft. Some malware stolen information from my Firefox profile (logins, passwords etc) almost a decade ago. Fortunately I have never used in-browser password manager to store credentials for important sites like banking or main e-mail account. Furthermore it was on Windows and I didn't access most important account (banking) on Windows at all (Linux is my main OS for a long time ). I just scanned Windows from AV on boot/rescue disc, then Malwarebytes from inside Windows. It wasn't enough though, because I spotted some shady Firefox extension after those AV/anti-malware scans that I suspect still tried to steal more data. I decided that I don't know about Windows enough to be reassured that malware is completely removed, so I wiped and reinstalled Windows week or two later. And of course changed my passwords.

I have never been a victim of malware encrypting or removing files.

 

Absolutely right. You have to look out for you as too many companies do the bare minimum or not even to safeguard your data. I count on my offline storage first and Defender last (no offense but you're not a first responder in this context).

I do store some passwords in Firefox but the more important ones (PayPal, utilities, Steam, gmail) require 2- and multi-factor authentication involving my offline phone. So far so good--for several years now. My ATT password and my Yahoo email were stolen and since then, I take this stuff seriously--like you do when this happens to you personally. Can;t control what happens on the corporate side, obviously.

 

There are a lot of low probability (really low probability) fears expressed here and yes- you are right. Security breach for us non-rich home users is almost unheard of yet we get posts regarding it.

 

Attacks that do not target VIP target everybody. If you don't stick to basic security measures your device or bank account will be accordingly infected/taken over eventually. On the other hand when non-VIP sticks consistently then there is low probability.

 

Right, I would never trust even the best AV solutions to reliably scan for and clean up an infection, even from a recovery pen drive. If infected, I will always recover with a backup image - nothing beats it. That said, I don't really consider an image backup/recovery solution as part of my security; more like it's a fast and reliable way to restore back to normal if things go south, whether it be from an infection, a software installation gone bad, or from making ill-advised changes to the O/S, the latter of which I have done on a few occasions. It's a great insurance policy that affords peace of mind.

 

It has always been easier to tear down than to build, so if you think you are 100% sure, then you most certainly are not. You can try to follow as best you can and be careful, use programs that are considered good, but you will never be 100% secure

 

Am image backup is the only security. The typical AV stuff is nice, but it cannot provide what an image does in the event of malware or sundry OS failures, etc.