Microsoft Security Essentials.
in [Windows Viruses]
|
Prev: Trojan-Spy.Win32.Agent.beaf
Next: New Version Trojan?
From: "FromTheRafters" erratic on 20 Mar 2010 20:02 "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message news:eZuTJXIyKHA.2012(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > From: "FromTheRafters" <erratic @nomail.afraid.org> > > | "~BD~" <BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk> wrote in message > | news:YaydnRoE2Mes1TjWnZ2dnUVZ7v6dnZ2d(a)bt.com... > >>> If you were going to chose separate protection elements for use >>> against today's threats, FTR - which would *you* recommend as likely >>> to provide better protection than MSE? > > | I don't know. I haven't tried MSE. MSE certainly seems to have > potential > | (considering the Microsoft userbase communication aspect), but you > can > | bet it will soon become the most targeted by anti-antimalware > malware. > | Just as IE suffered through the security experts mantra of > "alternative > | browser" largely because of it being targeted, MSE may be similarly > | afflicted. > > > > You'd be surprised at all the malware I see specifically targeting > Kaspersky and Avira. Historically, they have both been good. I suppose their popularity is much of the reason that they are attacked.
From: David H. Lipman on 20 Mar 2010 20:08 From: "FromTheRafters" <erratic @nomail.afraid.org> | Microsoft is perfectly capable of purchasing the necessary technology to | have themselves a bite of the antimalware pie. | You don't really think that they build this stuff from the ground up all | by themselves do you? | Yes, I know, given enough time they will probably screw things up. I | think they have a chance to compete because more and more it is coming | down to the ability to react to a new threat quickly (early warning, and | speedy distribution of the necessary definitions files) being the | crucial metric. They may be in a good place to get information on an | outbreak, maybe quicker than other honeypot operations, because of their | "Joe user" userbase already being accustomed to the umbilical cord | paradigm (MSE has encountered an error (blah blah blah) - send report to | Microsoft). They didn't. they bought the GeCAD RAV engine and have incorporated in all their AV software (MSE, MRT and OneCare) and I was recently told that it is "evolved" over the past 7 years. -- Dave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp
From: ~BD~ on 20 Mar 2010 21:37 Leythos wrote: > In article<4OqdnTkd0uHPvTjWnZ2dnUVZ8kmdnZ2d(a)bt.com>, > BoaterDave(a)hot.mail.co.uk says... >> what anti-malware software does >> your *family* use on their computers in your *home*? > > All of my computers as well as family and friends, and even clients, > have started moving to Avira from Symantec End Point Protection > products. > > You already know this BD, stop trolling. > I wish you'd just accept my questions for what they are. I'm *not* trolling! I accept that my memory isn't quite what it was! OK - if you told me before that you use Avira - fine. But isn't that just anti-virus? I haven't looked for a while. What about all the other malware that is *not* a virus? Maybe deliberately, I appreciate, you avoided my question ..... ..... but what *is* your view regarding OS X? -- Dave
From: David Kaye on 21 Mar 2010 08:47 Leythos <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> wrote: >The important question is: Why would you trust Microsoft to protect the >computer from malware when they can't even secure ANY OS platform USED >BY NORMAL PEOPLE? Microsoft has done a lot of work toward patching up problems. A lot of the problem with malware now is social engineering, not drive-by payloads, and I don't see that there's much MS or anybody can do to fix that. I've been doing the malware fight fulltime for over 8 years and the number of calls for malware help keeps going down. Today I do more networking, hardware repair, and component integration than I do malware removal.
From: David H. Lipman on 21 Mar 2010 08:05
From: "David Kaye" <sfdavidkaye2(a)yahoo.com> | Leythos <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> wrote: >>The important question is: Why would you trust Microsoft to protect the >>computer from malware when they can't even secure ANY OS platform USED >>BY NORMAL PEOPLE? | Microsoft has done a lot of work toward patching up problems. A lot of the | problem with malware now is social engineering, not drive-by payloads, and I | don't see that there's much MS or anybody can do to fix that. | I've been doing the malware fight fulltime for over 8 years and the number of | calls for malware help keeps going down. Today I do more networking, hardware | repair, and component integration than I do malware removal. Leythos is point at the fact MS software has too many vulnerabilities. So if they create software with an inordinate amount of vulnerabilities he questions "Why would you trust Microsoft to protect the computer from malware..." in reference to anti malware software. I disagree with your assertion about "...problem with malware now is social engineering, not drive-by payloads..." as both are high on the infection vector modes. The number of sites compramised and their code changed to host malware or redirect to sites that host malware is still high. -- Dave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp |