Is Microsoft Security Essentials sufficient for anti-virus??

[synoptic12]

We've seen the stats regarding M.S.E., and really paid no attention to the detractors. M.S.E. works extremely well, as we have tested the capability somewhat; 'within reason'. Naturally, the operator is the most vulnerable, contingent upon what is researched.

Well, 360 is not that configurable either, being a Chinese program. However one may view security, the package has all of the files; when scanning or downloading', "Extracting files" > So there are no secrets for any to hide. The key point is, The security can override a system if the administrator chooses to do so. Remember, every key is logged.

Aside from that triviality, M.S.E. performs well. We previously installed Symantec Endpoint but that was a really heavy program. In reality, M.S.E. gets the job done. Sometimes, where the main crowd gathers is where hackers can exploit a security. So, we reverse the obvious to possibly obtain better results. Shouldn't have really mentioned this.

 

[Bob.]

I use MSE here, in my office. I've never found need for more simply because due diligence is at play. And any outside machines I bring in get put on their own subnet, isolated by their own router w/firewall. I like your sig, btw.

 

[synoptic12]

Yes, that is correct, 'due diligence', whereas the many delve into muddy waters, we would believe. Other than adware, such as pointed out above (UniDeals), really never encountered any security problems. Thank you for the compliment in reference to the sig. There have been a few others referencing the signature. Nice talking with you.

 

[sbpromania]

Microsoft Security Essentials is enough if you couple it with some common sense AV (avoid malicious and non-secure websites). I had MSE for a few years, on Windows 7, and I did not have any problems.

 

[synoptic12]

Microsoft Security Essentials is enough if you couple it with some common sense AV (avoid malicious and non-secure websites). I had MSE for a few years, on Windows 7, and I did not have any problems.

Does not M.S.E. incorporate AV?

 

[sbpromania]

Does not M.S.E. incorporate AV?

Indeed, but by common sense AV I meant to say that the user should be the first "anti-virus", avoiding malicious websites and following the common sense rules of internet surfing.

 

[synoptic12]

Indeed, but by common sense AV I meant to say that the user should be the first "anti-virus", avoiding malicious websites and following the common sense rules of internet surfing.

Sorry, I bypassed the 'common sense'. You are most correct which should be a reminder to all.

 

[bigboxes]

I don't get the MSE bashing, either. MSE is good enough. I use MSE in conjuction with SpywareBlaster to keep stuff off in the first place. I also scan with SuperAntiSpyware and Malwarebytes on a weekly basis or when I'm suspicious of something. I've got lots of other tools if it's something more nefarious. Basically, you're not going to get infected unless you practice unsafe surfing habits.

I clean up computers for a living and keep on telling my clients how to avoid this stuff in the first place. I'll keep taking their money, but sometimes I wonder why they click on stuff in the first place. Heck, I downloaded some software off of CNET and *BAM!* I was infected with some nasty malware that I spent and evening cleaning up. I left a nasty review. I also recommend running adblock.

 

[IlllI]

On the Dennis Technology Labs website,products can earn certification at five levels: AAA, AA, A, B, or C. Panda squeaked by with C-level certification. Kaspersky, Norton, ESET, Avast, and Trend Micro managed AAA. Of all the products tested, only Microsoft didn't earn at least a C grade. Seems pretty awful.

 

[sbpromania]

If you want to use MSE, make sure that you also have Malwarebytes installed, in order to run periodic scans. Also, install Adblock and NoScript add-ons, for browsers.

Finally, you can go with the free version of Avast, while retaining the periodical Malwarebytes scans.

 

[Tsavo]

I don't get the MSE bashing, either. MSE is good enough. I use MSE in conjuction with SpywareBlaster to keep stuff off in the first place. I also scan with SuperAntiSpyware and Malwarebytes on a weekly basis or when I'm suspicious of something. I've got lots of other tools if it's something more nefarious. Basically, you're not going to get infected unless you practice unsafe surfing habits.

I clean up computers for a living and keep on telling my clients how to avoid this stuff in the first place. I'll keep taking their money, but sometimes I wonder why they click on stuff in the first place. Heck, I downloaded some software off of CNET and *BAM!* I was infected with some nasty malware that I spent and evening cleaning up. I left a nasty review. I also recommend running adblock.

It's not bashing because it's 100% garbage. I've lost count of the machines I've seen with MSE but were loaded to the nuts with malware.

 

[mikeymikec]

It's not bashing because it's 100% garbage. I've lost count of the machines I've seen with MSE but were loaded to the nuts with malware.

I've lost count of the machines I've seen with Avast / Norton / MSE / AVG / Kaspersky that were infected with malware, but that doesn't make any of them garbage.

Running malware on a Windows machine without AV probably brings a 99% chance of infection. IMO, running the same malware on a Windows machine with AV reduces the chance of infection down to a flip of a coin; did the AV's recent updates cover that particular piece of malware? Did the AV react to an identified piece of malware in a comprehensive fashion? Or was the malware designed to target and neuter that particular brand of AV?

I took a customer's computer home today to address a serious infection that Avast wasn't able to handle, connected the disk to my own PC, and MSE picked up a piece of malware that Avast and Malwarebytes missed. On another occasion I'm sure the positioning of the products (which picked up the malware and which ones missed it), will be switched.

 

[Ketchup]

I've lost count of the machines I've seen with Avast / Norton / MSE / AVG / Kaspersky that were infected with malware, but that doesn't make any of them garbage.

+1. If you want to help people, tell them to stop clicking on just anything (maybe install an adblocker) because there are people (and I bet we all know at least one) who will infect their computer, no matter what you put on it.

 

[synoptic12]

If you want to use MSE, make sure that you also have Malwarebytes installed, in order to run periodic scans. Also, install Adblock and NoScript add-ons, for browsers.

Finally, you can go with the free version of Avast, while retaining the periodical Malwarebytes scans.

We have no issues in deploying MSE, none. We use not Malwarebytes, nor avast, nor Adblock.

 

[synoptic12]

It's not bashing because it's 100% garbage. I've lost count of the machines I've seen with MSE but were loaded to the nuts with malware.

We use Microsoft Security Essentials and we have no problems with any malware. We see MSE as 100% secure and very light weight.

 

[synoptic12]

I don't get the MSE bashing, either. MSE is good enough. I use MSE in conjuction with SpywareBlaster to keep stuff off in the first place. I also scan with SuperAntiSpyware and Malwarebytes on a weekly basis or when I'm suspicious of something. I've got lots of other tools if it's something more nefarious. Basically, you're not going to get infected unless you practice unsafe surfing habits.

I clean up computers for a living and keep on telling my clients how to avoid this stuff in the first place. I'll keep taking their money, but sometimes I wonder why they click on stuff in the first place. Heck, I downloaded some software off of CNET and *BAM!* I was infected with some nasty malware that I spent and evening cleaning up. I left a nasty review. I also recommend running adblock.

Thank you very much. In reality, we do not see any problems with MSE. We do not use any AV nor any other "gaff" security applications. MSE scans as expected and performs all tasks associated with security. How any can degrade MSE is beyond us. We would certainly provide an A+ rating in using Microsoft Security Essentials, irrespective of the negative feedback from a few.

As stated in prior threads, we used Symantec Endpoint, and we noticed many false positives, (maybe good, maybe not). Endpoint was far too heavy of an application, in which boot up time was 1:45 to 2:00 minutes. MSE boots up in 45 seconds flat, "And no issues". We really like to know how all these naysayers become infected with virus's, and malware, and anything else.

* Whichever way you look at it, "All security applications 'extract' one's files. Think about that for a while.

 

[mikeymikec]

We use Microsoft Security Essentials and we have no problems with any malware. We see MSE as 100% secure and very light weight.

Except of course that nothing is 100% secure.

 

[bigboxes]

Except of course that nothing is 100% secure.

That and you can't protect the computer from the user. LOL