Windows Defender Is Becoming the Powerful Antivirus That Windows 10 Needs

Malware cant register as an antivirus provider, it would need a WHCP signing certificate driver to do so along with some other requirements (ELAM driver); this theoretical vector is almost impossible to occur in real life.

 

So I guess to really lock it down you'd need to activate core isolation to prevent unknown drivers from ever loading.

 

"Intel CPU Performance Takes a Big Hit Due to Windows Defender Bug...

If you're running Windows 10 or Windows 11 on an Intel processor, chances are your performance is being negatively impacted by a Windows Defender bug...

...Defender will 'randomly start using all seven hardware performance counters provided by Intel Core processors.' This causes excessive CPU time to be grabbed by Defender, which can equate to a significant performance drop for your system. The example Glynn gives is a 'Core i9-10850K running at 5.00 GHz all-core loses 1000 Cinebench points (or 6%).'...

The problem is solely caused by Windows Defender...

...a third-party fix is available if you don't mind installing some software. TPU's ThrottleStop v9.5(Opens in a new window) includes a feature you'll find in "Options" called "Windows Defender Boost."..."

https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-cpu-performance-takes-a-big-hit-due-to-windows-defender-bug

 

@hawki :
6% is not a big hit, I say.
Is there any evidence, that this even happen's in normal use, other than bench marking?

 

I haven't noticed any drop in performance when I decide to play with MSD. Then again, I use defender UI to limit the CPU usage for scanning down to 10%

 

No performance hit on my five computers. In fact, Defender is one of the least restrictive of all 11 AVs I have used and tested.

 

What's this I keep hearing about MS Defender costing money in the future?

 

It won't for Windows users.
https://au.pcmag.com/antivirus/94646/wtf-do-i-have-to-pay-for-microsofts-defender-antivirus-now

 

never knew that Smart Screen filter only works on Edge! That's a huge plus in my book as I don't want anything affecting my browsing speeds on my main browser.

 

I figured someone would clarify the situation at some point. Thanks for the link.

 

Yeah, not paying for Defender. I already paid for it when I bought my mainboard. I "love" how these articles with their potentially panic-inducing titles and whose titles can be answered in one word (yes or no) take like paragraphs to get to the meat and potatoes.

But anyway, yes, thanks for the reassurance.

 

Yep, clickbait pays the bills. I bet most folks would not pay for Defender so Microsoft can't go back now. What could they do? Leave you unprotected? The backlash from doing so would be massive. I like the free option for folks that can't or won't pay. But if it were paid I would not use it. Fortunately it was verified that this is not the case.

 

Not saying I agree or disagree, just fount this interesting:
https://www.pcworld.com/article/797877/do-i-need-windows-antivirus-software.html

Enjoy,
Acadia

 

An interesting article and I mostly agree, though I think they should have included the word "additional" in the title.

 

As an ordinary user I think MS Defender in its current iteration is more than enough, but even if I were (say) a celebrity, I wouldn't install a paid AV as the degree of protection would be the same as Defender. If I had to increase the level of protection I would probably add other tools dealing with specific threats... I can't understand how one can write an article on computer security without mentioning backup programs which in my opinion are the mothers of all security.

 

The so-called experts are usually not that expert. I have used computers since 1970 (yes before PCs) and the current state of affairs as to opinions, etc. regarding computer security are not very helpful. I have said in this forum many times that the ultimate security is a daily image backup. I use Defender, but I could use any of them and for me, they are almost inconsequential. Backup-backup and more backup.

 

Read the last paragraph again, or for the first time.
Acadia

 

'Robust data backups' is not like backing up your system with a backup program, I would never comment an article without reading it...

 

Obviously you did not follow the embedded link, or is that too much to ask?
Acadia

 

I read the article of PCWorld. Three personal considerations:

- the author too agrees that someone may want an extra protection ( may be, I add, if or because he is experienced ).

- I'm not sure that Windows Defender also using all his features, is strong as an HIPS ( it's not a provocation ! ).

- as second scan, why not think also at Emsisoft ?

 

Obviously I find your attitude finicky and rude, when I read articles of any kind it is my prerogative to check links embedded according to context, his text reads ‘robust data backups’ which I didn’t deem necessary to check as data backups have no interest to me and if it links to real system backups he should have reworded it accordingly.

 

Reckon you're right, all apologies.
Acadia

 

I have to say that sometimes I do get to see WD taking up CPU time for no good reason. Perhaps my system is somewhat impacted by this, but I guess I will need to check out those tools to I see if it makes any difference.

And as mentioned in another thread, I do find it weird that when I open folders with many .mp4 files which are sorted by date, there is this small but annoying 2 second delay, never had this on Win 8.1 which didn't have Win Defender enabled. Because obviously it was crap.

 

Has anyone seen those videos cruelsister1 made about MS Defender failing to stop magniber?

CS did a test with MS Defender with configure defender on MAX. They restarted the VM and ran the test and MSD failed to stop it. That was a month ago.

Earlier today, they did the test again with the same sample of magniber from a month ago. And MSD with configure defender on MAX failed to stop a month-old sample of magniber.

 

Yes, and the sky is falling and the world is ending!