dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
9338
share rss forum feed

bennor
Premium
join:2006-07-22
New Haven, CT

1 recommendation

reply to Liberty

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials Security Essentials Scores Low in Protection

said by Liberty:

So why not have a mac then?

Mac's are not immune from viruses and malware.


cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27
Yeah. My ClamAV scanner found trojans exe files in attachments (those are for windows).
MSE is fine as long as you have anti-malware that is actively checking (like MBAM). I have MSE, MBAM and SAS running on Win7Pro and no issues. And running pretty well on a VM.
MSE alone and surfing without having updates for AMO (Adobe/Microsoft/Oracle are the vectors attacked) just means you might as well have nothing.
Besides, didn't all AV vendors proclaim that virii are not on the rise or the threat as much as malware and phishing?
Adservers... there are your threats. Adblock+ and NoScript are your friends.
--
Splat

Liberty

join:2005-06-12
Tucson, AZ
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
reply to bennor
Waiting to be flamed as a fanboy.
I just want to use my computer and not make a hobby of it.

Have any links to support your post?

No way to protect against stupid but using OSX makes stupid less dangerous is helpful.

...No computer system is completely immune from possible attack, but Apple's OS X (being Unix-based) is less vulnerable than most...

There are many forms of 'Malware' that can affect a computer system, of which 'a virus' is but one type, 'trojans' another. Using the strict definition of a computer virus, no viruses that can attack OS X have so far been detected 'in the wild', i.e. in anything other than laboratory conditions. The same is not true of other forms of malware, such as Trojans. (The expression 'malware' is a general term used by computer professionals to mean a variety of forms of hostile, intrusive, or annoying software. Not all malware are viruses.) Whilst it is a fairly safe bet that your Mac will NOT be infected by a virus, it may have other security-related problem, but more likely a technical problem unrelated to any malware threat.

»discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-2435


Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
reply to Oleg
MSE is fine for what it is, and its what i use.

MSE + Software Restriction Policies + EMET = profit.

MSE has ZERO false positives..infact I don't think its had any major false positive problems like the other vendors have had.

Test MSE against the most prevalent threats over the last 30 days and i bet it scores well...thats its purpose...to protect against the most prevalent stuff, and it does that well enough IMO.
--
Tech Tips


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bright House

1 recommendation

reply to Liberty
That opinion piece is a perfect example of: "It doesn't happen" paper shields along with poor knowledge itself. Really though, OSX itself is still a lightweight target, the big targets are their mobile devices because they're more widespread. Though as a point, a trojan can also be a virii even in the strictest sense. And since most people who use apple PC's also use apple mobile devices, the easiest attack vector is the mobile devices.

As for being a hobby, here's a question. If you preform basic preventive maintenance on a car, does that make it a hobby or simple common sense? If you do the same on a computer, doesn't that also make common sense?
--
The Art of War
"Excessive law is no law." - Cicero
The man who fed the world


EUS
Kill cancer
Premium
join:2002-09-10
canada
Reviews:
·voip.ms
reply to Oleg
Here's a very specific piece of advice, MSE does not protect against shady sites offering mods for your child's minecraft game, but Avast (for example) does.
Given the popularity of the game, I feel it's worth mentioning.
--
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
~ Project Hope ~

bennor
Premium
join:2006-07-22
New Haven, CT

1 recommendation

reply to Liberty
said by Liberty:

Waiting to be flamed as a fanboy.
I just want to use my computer and not make a hobby of it.

Have any links to support your post?

I simply said Macs are not immune from "viruses" and that is 100% accurate, just as it is accurate to say that it is very difficult for a virus to infect OS X or that no virus has currently been found "in the wild" that infects OS X.

While nothing may have been found "in the wild" as of yet, proof of concept virus's like OS X 'Macarena' and more recently Clapzok.A. have been created to show that OS X can be infected by a virus.

If OS X had the market penetration that Windows OS's have then its a good bet there would be viruses in the wild affecting it. Same would most likely go for Linux OS's as well if they had similar market penetration that Windows OS's currently have.

Velnias

join:2004-07-06
Hacker: nah, only 70 million MAC OS X and half billion of iOS users - not worth to bother. Linux? - add at least 20 millions... and few hundred millions Android users - to small too...


DarkSithPro

join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ
kudos:2
reply to Oleg
A lot of us use MSE just to stop the annoying warnings and nagware that comes with other free and paid AVs to go away. The most popular and expensive AV you guys buy these days are going to be the most common ones the bad guys test their Trojans against before they release their malware that infects your machines. Think about that for a while...


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2

Microsoft is advising Windows users to use a third-party antivirus instead

Microsoft Security Essentials (Windows Defender on Windows 8) was once on top. Over the years, it’s slid in the test results, but Microsoft argued the tests weren’t meaningful. Now, Microsoft is advising Windows users to use a third-party antivirus instead. »www.howtogeek.com/173291/goodbye···tivirus/


DarkSithPro

join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ
kudos:2
said by Oleg:

Microsoft Security Essentials (Windows Defender on Windows 8) was once on top. Over the years, it’s slid in the test results, but Microsoft argued the tests weren’t meaningful. Now, Microsoft is advising Windows users to use a third-party antivirus instead. »www.howtogeek.com/173291/goodbye···tivirus/

Oleg, you don't get it. All AV has signature and heuristics. All most off them can be downloaded for free trial. What's the first thing a hacker is gonna do after he creates a Trojan? He's gonna download Norton, Mcaffee, and all the other popular ones you all use to see if his Trojan is detected. Oleg, what I'm trying to say to you is AV is useless bud, it don't matter anymore...


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2

1 edit
No. Microsoft Security Essentials is obsolete. Why don't you test MSE with virus samples and than tell me how well MSE does.


nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
kudos:7
FUD


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to Oleg
said by Oleg:

No. Microsoft Security Essentials is obsolete. Why don't you test MSE with virus samples and than tell me how well MSE does.

Why? To what end? None of the AV products can protect against a zero day virus. They all depend on having a virus sample to use to create a detection. That is why it is called a, "Zero Day Virus".

The only way to test against a zero day virus would be to create one, or receive one somebody else created; and I have already done that:

Norton: Fail!
F-Prot for DOS: Fail!
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2

4 edits
Seems like you are in favor of Microsoft Security Essentials Security as well.

Also not all AVs have a good heuristic detection. But yea Microsoft Security Essentials has better heuristic detection than most AVs do.

bennor
Premium
join:2006-07-22
New Haven, CT

1 edit
reply to Velnias

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials Security Essentials Scores Low in Protection

said by Velnias:

Hacker: nah, only 70 million MAC OS X and half billion of iOS users - not worth to bother. Linux? - add at least 20 millions... and few hundred millions Android users - to small too...

If one is comparing apples to apples so to speak Windows XP and Windows 7 supposedly account for 75% of the desktop PC market. So ask your self, if a hacker is going to spend their time hacking one OS, will they spend it trying to attack 75% of the market or less than 25% of the market?

You do hit on the future though. As more and more people move from PC's and laptops to tablets and smartphones things will shift and the virus/malware hackers will target the largest OS's (iOS and Android) in each of those environments.

bennor
Premium
join:2006-07-22
New Haven, CT
reply to Oleg

Re: Microsoft is advising Windows users to use a third-party antivirus instead

said by Oleg:

Now, Microsoft is advising Windows users to use a third-party antivirus instead. »www.howtogeek.com/173291/goodbye···tivirus/

To be fair that link also states:

Microsoft has now released a statement, saying "We believe in Microsoft antimalware products and strongly recommend them to our customers, to our friends, and to our families."

Direct link to the full Microsoft statement.


Parad0X787
"If U know neither the enemy nor yoursel
Premium
join:2013-09-17
Edmonton, AB
reply to Oleg

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials Security Essentials Scores Low in Protection

"ZERO day" ¿ ¿ ... "Zero-day protection" products include "non-signature anti-malware products" and "host [based] intrusion prevention systems" or HIPS for short. !!! HOPE we are prepare 4 it.


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bright House

1 recommendation

reply to nwrickert

Re: Microsoft is advising Windows users to use a third-party antivirus instead

said by nwrickert:

FUD

It's not FUD sadly, MSE is only getting core updates and priority fixes now. It'll last until Win7 reaches EoL or until MS replaces it with another product.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to Oleg
said by Oleg:

Seems like you are in favor of Microsoft Security Essentials Security as well.

I don't dislike it. But why pay for a product (Norton) which can't catch a zero day virus?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2
reply to Mashiki
Yep. MSE does not update their signature database every single day.


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2
reply to NormanS
And MSE can.? Oh yes it is free why pay for a good AV.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
said by Oleg:

And MSE can.? Oh yes it is free why pay for a good AV.

The question I ask is rhetorical; why pay for Fail when I can get Fail for free?

The issue is, the paid AV I was using couldn't catch one. Made it a waste of money.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


DarkSithPro

join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ
kudos:2

1 edit
reply to Oleg

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials Security Essentials Scores Low in Protection

If I was a gambler I would bet huge monies that any major security professional programmer that reads and posts here would laugh at the thought that a stand alone AV would be much of use. Even more so these professionals probably don't even use standard AV like the rest of us. They probably don't use Antivirus at all. They probably find it tedious and a waste of system resources. They have other ways of dealing with malware problems such as proactive approaches and using sandboxing technologies and limited user accounts to mitigate possible infections and deploy analysis tools to reverse engineer the code to protect against it. AV is for computer illiterate people who chose to trust and need a program to protect themselves instead of their brains.

»www.itproportal.com/2012/03/05/s···tivirus/

According to some of the industry's leading security professionals, Antivirus is pretty ineffective - so much so that most of them don't even use it.
This revelation came about when the boys at Wired visited the RSA Conferance and spoke with several higher ups at security firms, most of them claiming to not use antivirus, or even recommend it. Chief technology officer at White Hat Security, Jeremiah Grossman was one of them.
"If you asked the average security expert whether they use antivirus or not, a significant proportion of them do not," he said.
He was right too, as Dan Guido of Trail of Bits doesn't either. Neither does Paul Carugati who works in security at Motorola Solutions. The reason none of these guys bother with AV is because they avoid many of the ways a normal user comes into contact with malware: clicking on dubious attachments, following unsolicited links or visiting websites that might feature malicious content.
On top of this, most modern virus makers will test out their new bit of malware against the most popular antivirus software, meaning on day 0 of its release into the wild, it's very unlikely that any of the big named software bigwigs will catch it - because the nefarious bit of code is specifically designed to avoid detection and deletion.
Average businesses and end users of course still need to make use of the stalwart of online security, as even the technically savvy can occasionally click a link they didn't mean to, or get caught by a new clever attachment file name - but Antivirus is certainly becoming less of an important feature in online security than it used to be.
Being aware is often far more effective.

Read more: »www.itproportal.com/2012/03/05/s···4CJ8qlyD


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2
reply to NormanS

Re: Microsoft is advising Windows users to use a third-party antivirus instead

What is the name of AV you were using?.

Shady Bimmer
Premium
join:2001-12-03
Northport, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to Oleg
said by Oleg:

Yep. MSE does not update their signature database every single day.

Evidence?

Microsoft indicates otherwise: »answers.microsoft.com/en-us/prot···0e03ac4f

My own personal experience seems to find that MS does update their signatures as often as multiple times per day. This is in line with what other AV vendors follow.

dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

4 recommendations

reply to Oleg
Click for full size

MSE does not update their signature database every single day

I'm sorry to let facts intrude into a promising line of bullshit....


DarkSithPro

join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ
kudos:2
Dave, do you run AV and do rely on it? I know you're very well versed in the IT world and I have a hunch that you do noy rely on AV at all...

dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
I did not use to run any AV, but I run Microsoft Security Essentials now, for two main reasons.

1. My employer's VPN has started not allowing connections from Windows clients without some AV, and it eventually proved easier to not argue the matter.

2. MSE is sufficiently unobtrusive, unlike the ever-fatter freeware and commercial offerings, that given I needed it anyway, it seemed painless enough to leave it running all the time (rather than say, cranking it up just before using the VPN).


DarkSithPro

join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ
kudos:2
said by dave:

I did not use to run any AV, but I run Microsoft Security Essentials now, for two main reasons.

1. My employer's VPN has started not allowing connections from Windows clients without some AV, and it eventually proved easier to not argue the matter.

2. MSE is sufficiently unobtrusive, unlike the ever-fatter freeware and commercial offerings, that given I needed it anyway, it seemed painless enough to leave it running all the time (rather than say, cranking it up just before using the VPN).

Ok, so with that said and done I must ask why the hesitation from the security experts to openly admit that at Antivirus in itself is utterly useless. I understand a real need for people to eat and provide for their families that produce antivirus technologies to the masses. However if they're selling snake and oil to their consumers then that's just not right. If AV doesn't cut it for experts then it shouldn't cut it for trusting consumers. So essentially companies that produce antivirus technologies are selling failed products from the beginning, knowingly well that their products are useless against modern threats.