MSE?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by russland, Mar 29, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. russland

    russland Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Posts:
    10
    Location:
    United States
    I have been using MSE since 1-11-2011, I had used KIS before that time. I must say that MSE performs very well on W7. I gave up on KIS because of the system drain. I have found that MSE performs very well on W7. That said, it does not protect WXP very well. I like MSE on W7, but I would not use it on WXP, There are better solutions for WXP. So what are other user opinions of MSE?
     
  2. Cudni

    Cudni Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Posts:
    6,956
    Location:
    Somethingshire
    Check/search the forums for opinions on MSE (and just about any other AV available)
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2012
  3. HKEY1952

    HKEY1952 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Posts:
    648
    Location:
    HKEY/SECURITY/ (value not set)
    Installed Microsoft Security Essentials through Microsoft Update on an Microsoft WindowsXP SP3 machine quite some
    time ago, do not even know it is there. Safe surfing is intentionally not practiced on that machine. Microsoft
    Security Essentials on three seperate occations since it has been installed detected and removed attempts to drop
    Trojan Executables on the hard disk drive through Microsoft Internet Explorer Internet Cache Files. One of the
    Trojan Executables was hidden inside of an Stat Counter.

    I manually update Microsoft Security Essentials often, in fact, I just made it an habbit to update the definitions
    before I start an Internet session. I like the idea of manually updating, I know the definitions are up to date.

    Microsoft Security Essentials also uses Cloud Technology, so if Microsoft Security Essentials encounters an threat
    or malware where there exists no definitions in the database, the Cloud Technology of Microsoft Security Essentials
    kicks in to justify the deficit.

    Who exists the capability to protect the Microsoft Windows Operating System better than Microsoft.

    Also, do not underestamate the Microsoft WindowsXP SP3 Windows Firewall, also enabled on that abused machine,
    however, that is an different Topic for an different Thread.


    HKEY1952
     
  4. STV0726

    STV0726 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Posts:
    900
    I like it a lot.

    Unfortunately they have been dragging out v4 for a bit longer than I wished and their scores have dropped considerably now, though they still have never sunk as low as a Standard on AV-C since their OneCare days which is commendable.

    If you look at my "is your free AV performing well?" post you will see MSE gets 3rd place which is good. They earned this over Avira, Panda, and PC Tools because they've been great at enrolling themselves in almost every test possible.

    EDIT: Thanks HKEY for the correction. :)
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2012
  5. HKEY1952

    HKEY1952 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Posts:
    648
    Location:
    HKEY/SECURITY/ (value not set)
  6. russland

    russland Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Posts:
    10
    Location:
    United States
    I agree that they have been dragging the beta on too long. I have been using the MSE v4 beta for about a month now. It so far has proven to be even lighter on system than previous versions. My system and browsing response is a wee bit faster, it's not night & day or anything, but it's there.
     
  7. Doraemon

    Doraemon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Posts:
    202
    I've been using it for 1 year moreless on a W7 Pro x64 and it's been great so far! :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

    I now use it together with WSAC and they get along very well.

    The only thing I hate about MSE is that it takes AGES to scan folders with exe files (i.e. my downloads folder). :rolleyes: Hope they fix it as it takes 5-10 seconds to scan some downloads which IMO is too much.

    Apart from this, it performs very light on resources.

    And I tend not to believe those tests that show it perform bad. Just my 2 cents. :D :cool:
     
  8. adrenaline7

    adrenaline7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Posts:
    128
    Full scans take ages, it would be nice to block .avi and .jpg files from scans. Real time protection seems good, I don't notice it causing much drag so I can live with it pretty easily for real time protection and smart scans, I'll just use Emsisoft or Comodo portables for full scans.

    Does the V4 Beta have the box where you can uncheck real time protection? I like having that option but I heard they might take away some options in MSE.
     
  9. 1chaoticadult

    1chaoticadult Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Posts:
    2,248
    Location:
    Chaotic Land
    Yes it has the option to uncheck the realtime protection.
     
  10. pablozi

    pablozi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Posts:
    190
    Location:
    Oudenbosch
    I was using MSE on my W7 machine for quite a long time.
    Indeed it has almost no impact on system resources and for a user that also uses common sense it should be enough.
     
  11. Frank the Perv

    Frank the Perv Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Posts:
    882
    Location:
    Virginia, USA
    We have an older laptop, and we decided to stop paying for an AV -- in this case, Trend Micro.

    So off came Trend Micro.... and we installed MSE. In addition to MSE, we installed WinPatrol Plus (free with family pack) and Malwarebytes (one-time $20 cost).

    The point was to spend only $20 more on security for the remaining life of the computer rather than Trend's annual cost.

    What we did not expect -- the computer was much faster afterward.

    Saved money and got better protection with more speed.

    It's all good.
     
  12. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    USA
    I see this claim all of the time. Is it because that since MSE gives no visual indication that it is doing anything that this claim is made? I have caught it many time hogging disk I/O without showing in the interface the scan that it was running in the background. Especially with large ISO and compressed files.
     
  13. Cudni

    Cudni Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Posts:
    6,956
    Location:
    Somethingshire
    I always exclude archive type files from scanning (except on demand scan). I find most AV work much better like that
     
  14. HKEY1952

    HKEY1952 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Posts:
    648
    Location:
    HKEY/SECURITY/ (value not set)
    There are two places in the Settings of Microsoft Security Essentials where .avi and .jpg files
    can be excluded from scans:

    01] Settings/Excluded files and locations/
    02] Settings/Excluded file types/


    HKEY1952
     
  15. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,121
    Location:
    USA
    Have they improved self-protection for MSE? In this test (from Nov 2010) MSE was at the very bottom:

    http://www.anti-malware-test.com/?q=node/194
     
  16. HKEY1952

    HKEY1952 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Posts:
    648
    Location:
    HKEY/SECURITY/ (value not set)
    01] Set Microsoft Security Essentials to scan all downloads:
    Settings/Real-time protection/Scan all downloads/ -then

    02] Set Microsoft Security Essentials to exclude the downloads folder from scans:
    Settings/Excluded files and locations/

    Example: C:\Documents and Settings\USER\My Documents\Downloads

    The theory here is, to scan all files being downloaded. Once scanned during the download, the file(s) are now known
    to be safe. So now the downloads folder can be excluded from the scans. This setup will yield an more tolerable
    scanning setup. It is by far safer to tolerate the five to ten second scanning delay once during the downloads before
    the file(s) are written to the hard disk drive. Once the file(s) are written to the hard disk drive into the
    downloads folder, full system scans will be faster because the downloads folder is excluded from scans.


    HKEY1952
     
  17. russland

    russland Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Posts:
    10
    Location:
    United States
    I don't know the current self protection status of MSE as rated by any independent test labs, however the test you note is very dated and deals with MSE v1 and may have little bearing on following versions.
     
  18. STV0726

    STV0726 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Posts:
    900
    Regarding MSE and self-protection...I don't know how much Microsoft's MSE development team believes in "self-protection".

    One of their respected MCC's on Microsoft Answers, Rob Koch, answered me with this when I asked him if he thought they planned to add a self-protection module of some type since MSE will be included in Windows 8 by default and even more so widely expected (and therefore attacked) by hackers:

    :cautious: Not so sure I completely like this response. Sure, the power of least user access is fantastic and FAR too many people overlook it, but that doesn't make self-protection modules worthless. Anyone else?
     
  19. Zyrtec

    Zyrtec Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Posts:
    534
    Location:
    USA
    In the past, when I ran MSE [at least with version 2.1 on Win 7 -32 bit], I noticed that a folder on the local the hard drive or a folder on a USB drive containing many .EXE files [let's say 70-80 files] would take an eternity before I could access it entirely.

    The files inside the folder [mostly downloaded applications from FileHippo or Majorgeeks] would not display correctly while MSE was analyzing each one before allowing the file to be accessed. You could notice this as you hovered your mouse pointer over the file.

    Other AVs do something similar at the beginning, when you are accessing the folder for the first time. But, subsequently, if you go back and access the same folder with the .EXE files [assuming it's unchanged], the access time drops considerably and you can see the files without any lag almost instantaneously.
    Not with MSE, even when you have previously accessed the folder, MSE apparently "forgets" [so to speak] that it had already checked the files inside that folder.

    Furthermore, MSE by default, has the option of scanning within .ZIP and .RAR files enabled by default which slows down your PC by using unnecessary CPU resources whereas other AVs have that option unticked foreseeing the waste of CPU resources by doing that. Many AVs nowadays only scan archives upon extraction.



    Carlos
     
  20. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,121
    Location:
    USA
    This response from Microsoft seems clueless. Some malware are designed to specifically target AV. If AV is not designed to resist attack it is worthless against that kind of threat. I don't think they are helping users by allowing MSE to be easily killed to "prevent the CPU from going into overdrive". It seems obvious that security software needs to be stronger than the malware it's supposed to protect against.
     
  21. STV0726

    STV0726 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Posts:
    900
    I really, really loved MSE and it was my ultimate favorite free AV for a long time but their sliding performance, combined with the attitude of the MCCs and Community Stars that run the joint at Answers and viciously defend MSE's now mediocrity when you offer a suggestion scared me away frankly. The majority of people there will cling to MSE still simply because they believe it has some deep-rooted advantage into the OS being made by Microsoft, even though it is common sense this is false because they are good about playing by their own rules and not messing with the kernel.

    Rob Koch had the nerve to tell me it is malware's constant mutation that is to blame for MSE's lack of performance. Right, so malware mutates for Microsoft only and for like Avast it goes easy on them? Such a stupid answer. Other vendors have been able to be considerably more proactive with detecting mutating malware because they expect it to mutate. Microsoft apparently does not.

    "Hey guys, it is no secret that MSE is not detecting as much as it used to according to multiple test sites..." Say that, and you'll get a generic "no AV can provide 100% protection 100% of the time." Lovely response. If I went to a restaurant I have gone to for a year and it was great, then the second year food started going downhill and I finally said something to the manager, would he tell me "no restaurant can offer 100% delicious food 100% of the time"? Lol...

    How about the REAL Microsoft employees hiding behind their desks and lazily letting the MVPS run the show actually step out and give us some assurance that they know they have slipped and rely too much on signatures?

    I am sorry I switched to rant mode a bit...I had a fairly negative experience on MS Answers, obviously. They just don't seem to take feedback seriously. It is nothing more than the same small group of people rushing to get kudos to up their rank and all they do is copy paste form responses.
     
  22. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,121
    Location:
    USA
    I have to wonder why given Microsoft's history of always arriving late with watered down versions of programs already being provided by third party vendors. It's definitely a good thing that Microsoft is offering MSE (in fact it comes pre-installed in Windows 8 CP) , but why would anyone expect it to be more than rudimentary?
     
  23. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    Something that truly makes my nerves go up, is Rob Koch definition of behavior blocker - MSE's MAPS (Microsoft Active Protection Service).

    Basically, what it does is when MSE detects malware or unwanted software, if you have MAPS enabled, then it will send that info to Microsoft to help you better... o_O

    So... basically that will mean you're screwed. Screwed for a few reasons, actually. 1. MSE first needs to detect it. 2. You need to have MAPS enabled. 3. If you're concerned about privacy, then for sure you'll disable it. 4. Considering Microsoft allows MSE to be installed in small businesses with up to 10 computers, I do believe it to be disabled. 5. Internet connection enabled, at the moment the infection is detected.

    Regarding 1., why would it be necessary to send such info to Microsoft, if MSE is already able to protect you from those found threats? o_O Tracking, perhaps? o_O

    How about actually implementing something... smarter... useful?

    That Rob Koch guy should be cleaning toilets. o_O With good luck someone would offer him a broom, to help with the cleaning. :blink:
     
  24. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    The same reason any cloud heuristics system does it - speed. You can run way more advanced tests (full emulation of the program/ file analysis and both simultaneously) in less time. That and being able to cross-reference samples.

    Though I'm not sure if that's what's happening in this case. It definitely sounds nothing like behavioral blocking maybe just analysis.
     
  25. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Actually, yes. MSE has the largest market share in North America (33%) and a generally wide market share around the globe. It is exactly the case that malware attempts to mutate around MSE as a priority much more than other AVs with much smaller market shares.

    If I'm a hacker and my payload will be detected by MSE but not Avast I'm going to spend the time reworking it. If I get it so it's not detected by MSE but detected by Avast I might be willing to let it loose.

    It's really the opposite, again. Common sense dictates that the people with access to the source code and intricate knowledge of the inner workings of the OS also know where the flaws in security will most likely lie.

    MSE is not slipping due to dev laziness. It's slipping because it's popular. This is the case with any program - if it's popular it will either be hacked or (in the case of a security program) circumvented.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.