Microsoft Security Essentials Flunks AV-TEST, Loses Certification

32

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

steve771

Another Microsucks fail. Nothing to see here, move along. ;)

avatar

noobstix

MSE was bested by a drug cartel's program? My god, what has this world come to? The last time I used McAfee (which was many years ago when I was still a teenager), my computer still ran like it had a drug addiction. Hell, even the Dell PCs at my university run like a druggie sometimes. Sure I've gotten a few major things in the past that have crippled MSE (and Malwarebytes too) to the point where I had to start from a clean slate, but I've relied more on careful web-surfing habits to keep from anything really bad happening again. It's almost gotten to the point where I could uninstall MSE since I don't run a scan too often and it hasn't picked up anything for a long time.

avatar

whr4usa

you're assuming you've properly completely disabled automatic scans and that its live protection has done nothing for you

EMET ++ MBAM Pro Lifetime

avatar

leonardtj

Huh, I saw this and thought "I remember back when I worried about such things before I discovered the joys of Linux". With steam finally making the big move to Linux (even if it is Ubunutu) I hope my gaming friends will migrate as well. Then they can also enjoy downloading torrents and pron with reckless abandon. Also Linux makes you cooler than other Geeks! ;)

avatar

whr4usa

most linux distros epsecially in debian or busybox streams are have far poorer default or potential security than windows 7 or 8; there's a reason Microsoft and other tech. corporations will usually support CentOS or openSuse but not others!!

darkreading.com/advanced-threats/167901091/security/attacks-breaches/240142442/new-linux-rootkit-discovered-injecting-iframes.html?cid=nl_DR_daily_2012-11-23_html&elq=5c83936c51c644f6a8b874b9ada41d9e

avatar

davelray

But here's the crux. Once Steam goes to officially supporting linux, and starts getting more and more games ported over, and linux starts picking up more and more market share, Linux will start seeing more and more viruses. The reason that linux is not targeted by a ton of viruses has nothing to do with it being "more secure." It has to do with there's not enough people using it to make it a big enough target. Same thing happened with Mac. Now that more and more people have started using Apple computers, we've seen more viruses targeting them. There was a time when Apple, arrogantly, actually stated in their support knowledge base to NOT run antivirus software on their computers. That quickly changed. There is no such thing as the perfect os that cannot be attacked by a virus.

avatar

Shadow Death

Am I the only one who can't get past the fact that some how Bitdefender is on top?.... I claim pay off on this review by those guys.

avatar

TrollBot5000

I'd cross reference the finding with av-comparitives.org and look at the real world and file detection tests. From what I've gathered from the real world test is the best ones are Bitdefender, GDATA, FSecure and Kaspersky. Bitdefender being the best and the other 3 are even. Personally I use Avast 7 free on my windows 7 partitions because of the cost and its just about as good as the others. Then I run malwarebytes scans and hijackthis and use kaspersky rescue disk 10 on my YUMI multiboot. This article didn't surprise me in the slightest that microsoft's security solution is inferior. Always thought that now I have proof.

Here is the breakdown on av-comparatives.org rating system for the file detection test.
Total detection rates (clustered in groups):
1.
G DATA
99.9%
2.
AVIRA
99.8%
3.
Panda, Trend Micro
99.6%
4.
F-Secure
99.3%
5.
Kaspersky, BitDefender,
99.2%
BullGuard, Fortinet, eScan
6.
McAfee
98.8%
7.
Sophos
98.7%
8.
Avast
98.6%
9.
GFI Vipre
98.5%
10. AVG 98.0%
11. ESET 97.4%
12. AhnLab 95.6%
13. Microsoft 94.9%
14. PC Tools 94.4%
15. Webroot
below 80%3

Advanced+ 3 Star *** Antivirus

AVIRA
Trend Micro
F-Secure
Kaspersky
BitDefender
BullGuard
Fortinet
eScan
McAfee
Avast

Advanced+ 2 Star **

G DATA*
Panda*
Sophos*
GFI Vipre*
ESET * Asterix indicates lower score due to higher FPs.

Advanced+ 1 Star *
AVG*
Microsoft
PC Tools

avatar

whr4usa

I suggest you try adding more sources to your 1-click pseudo-research sir!

av-comparatives is a great site I also reference but it completely ignores quite a few of the most important aspects of security since due to the very nature of their service, they must use an 'LCD' [Lowest Common Denominator] (for those whom don't know math) approach in order to properly compare

Microsoft has continuously stated that based on their telemetry and experience both "zero days" and "registry hijacks" amongst other examples are better handled via other protection mechanisms (as oppossed to antivirus apps) or/and have negligible impact so they don't spend additional resources attempting to integrate zero-day protections or generate a much-more-dangerous false sense of security hence why EMET, AppLocker and Bitlocker as well as other security mechanisms exist

that said I use a very comprehnsive and well-researchd toolkit for myself and business

avatar

Sir Hobbes3

Yeah, seeing as MSE has protected me in the past, i dont think ill worry about it. And besides, you shouldn't be downloading odd files or visting weird sites that might get your computer infected in the first place.

avatar

bloodgain

The free AVs seem to go through 2 year cycles of being good, then slack off and it's time to install something different. It's probably true, and just MS's turn for their AV to suck.

Grabbed a 2-year sub for Bitdefender Total Security for 3 PCs at Newegg for $20 (EMCJJHA76 promo code, only works if you get their promo newsletter). I'll worry about it again in a couple of years, or if MPC reams BitDefender in a roundup.

avatar

Hilarity

What no one ever mentions is you can pick most of these packages as OEM 1 user installs from your local PC store for $15 or so a year. Just saying. I can't be bothered. It all comes down to common sense in the end.

avatar

SPreston2001

Ive used MSE and Malwarebytes for years and never came across anything that was extremely dangerous. I have Malwarebytes Pro which has real time protection and it runs great alongside MSE. I install MSE on every PC I build and it serves its purpose...

avatar

whr4usa

smart man!

now just add EMET 3.x and run as a standard user and you're set! (mostly)

avatar

SPreston2001

Thanks! I'll check it out!

avatar

Strangelove_424

That's fine, I only use MSE for the placebo effect anyway. I am unwilling to sacrifice any more PC performance or money on anti-virus. Safe habits keep you protected, not software. And failing that, if something really goes wrong, I'd rather deal with a complete reinstall once in a blue moon than a slow computer and stuttering games everyday. The money thing is a serious issue too. Have you seen that McAfee guy? Your anti-virus subscription ends up in a 14 year old Belizean girl's thong. F--- that.

avatar

Bullwinkle J Moose

Hey, she said she was 17

PLUG AND PLAY BAYBEE....Yeah
-------------------------------------------
Seriously though, at least 93% of the Johm McAfee rumors are untrue

He did a 1 hour Live interview Nov 27th on the Alex Jones show while still in hiding

Good Stuff

avatar

gooberific

I used to use Eset Antivirus.
I thought it was quite user friendly and was doing a great job abd was fairly light on system resources . Then I installed Bitdefender , still ok on system resources but not nearly as user freindly ..... but it found 47 trojan horses on my system that ESET didn't detect . I used Bitdefender in rescue mode to scan and clean my system and lo and behold the amount of spam mail I was getting droped by 95% .
I tried Bitdefender based on several AV sites rankings , AV-test being one , and if you average across several sites , you get a pretty spot on prediction of the various AV's accuracy etc.
I'll go back to ESET the day they score at least number 2 on the list .

avatar

John Pombrio

MSE is good enough for me. I run a couple of other suites every few months and they have never found anything I considered more than trivial.
I am always leery of companies who make their money with malware rating other programs or how bad the infection rate is. It's in their best interest to slam the competition and hype the dangers. Just good business.

avatar

wolfing

To me, what matters most is how much the PC's performance is affected by the antivirus. In my whole life I've seen 2 or 3 virus in my computers (first one in 1988 or so), but a degraded performance would affect me every day.

avatar

Vano

You can tell how reliable their tests are, when you see Panda beating ESET...yeah, right.

avatar

HiGHRoLLeR038

What! I cant believe it only did a hair better than McAfee. This is all just one company's opinion, IN GERMANY!

avatar

whr4usa

av-test's methodology is flawed in so many ways

first off, what does it say when the maximum score in a given area is a 6 but you only need an 11 to be 'certified'? could Apple write an antivirus that scores a 'perfect' 6 for usability but only 3 for protection and 2 for repair lol?

...let's just cherry pick the 2 most popular (and thus targeted) OS' in the world, take the defaults, then use it in order to discredit a free and effective app just because it comes from the vendor of said popular OS' in order to keep the mostly-failing 3rd-party av market alive!

both personally and for my business and as an IA\T professional I tend to install MSE in conjunction with MBAM and EMET unless there's an interoperable network situation in which case I've found BitDefender Sphere to work best overall; Kaspersky is decent but prices itself out of most of my jobs' budgets.

avatar

X2brute

you just described what microsoft did, got great on usability and horrid on everything else. just saying though, usability is important. say you couldn't figure out how to run scans or update it. it doesn't matter if you have the most powerful pc in the world if the power switch is installed behind a high torque bladed cooling fan.

avatar

whr4usa

how in the world were you able to grab that meaning?

what you just replied has nothing to do with what I said...I didn't even address usability . . .

avatar

Morete

MSE is great at detecting viruses and rootkits, but they are horrible at removing them. I use G Data and it works well. G Data's zero day virus signatures need to be worked on though, and they need an auto gaming mode that disables the firewall while loading pre-installed non-web browser games.

avatar

Peanut Fox

I don't think the competition would fair significantly better. They all use similar blacklisting technology for detection. John Strand talked about using whitelisting rather than blacklisting.

Still, Microsoft should really look into bringing some serious AV mechanisms to the table. If not them perhaps Intel or another third party.

avatar

JohnnyCNote

I also recommend it to friends and family members. For the majority it's a choice between MSE or nothing. It's not a major consideration for them, unfortunately . . .

avatar

Gezzer

Personally I run MSE. But I've found that good habits are more important then anything anyway.

avatar

savage4naves

WestCoast Labs current threat detection rating for Microsoft Security Essentials is 88% over the last 28 days. Avast and AVG are in the same boat at 89%.

I've personally never been infected with MSE. I will continue to recommend it to family and peers.

avatar

wolfing

that's the problem, maybe you are infected, but MSE doesn't detect it

avatar

savage4naves

The same could be said about any antivirus. There isn't a 100% safeguard!

A weekly on demand scan from Malwarebytes is a great second opinion.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.