Microsofts excellent free antivirus released today, MSE

A friend of mine (Yeoldstonecat) suggested this on a tech site we frequent and I thought I'd pass it on to you guys.

http://www.microsoft.com/Security_essentials/

This is his write up.

Microsoft Security Essentials, BETA was out mid summer, officially released today.

http://www.microsoft.com/Security_essentials/

It's a VERY good antivirus product, I've been using the BETA for months now in cleaning up infested computers, it's doing a very good job at getting current malware threats, and it will only get better.

Free, free updates, should remain nag free, lightweight on your system too.

So far the best free antivirus has been AntiVir...very lightweight and excellent in detection. But some people find the interface a bit complicated, and they don't like the advertisements of the free version.

In my experience in cleaning infected computers, and in reading various other AV comparison articles, MSE is nearly as good in detection...and it's fast getting better with their SkyNet cloud technology.

For most people who use a free antivirus....I strongly recommend you consider this product.

Click to expand...

I am going to give it a test drive. Nothing like efficient and free.

AntiVir and Nortons Antivirus don't like each other.

Tell us what you think after you test it for a while, Lefty. There is a lot of nasty malware out there right now, and some of it even gets past the filters in web-mail and Thunderbird now. I've been using Avast, Spy-Bot, Ad-Aware, Malwarebyte and CrapCleaner to try and keep my system clean.

It does seem to coexist with AVG full version just fine by the way. I've got it installed which I did with everything up and running no problem at all. I also use Malwarebyte as well so it all seems to be compatable.

joec said:

It does seem to coexist with AVG full version just fine by the way. I've got it installed which I did with everything up and running no problem at all. I also use Malwarebyte as well so it all seems to be compatable.

Click to expand...

running multiple real time anti-virus products is not recommend. use one, use another, not both simultaneously.

I monitor a number of 'computer' boards and note with amusement all the implementation/installation/update/>[ad nauseum] issues things like Norton, McAfee, etc. have. I've been using Antivira since the mid 90's - it is consistently rated in the top performers (depending on the day of the week and hour of the day, it's tops or 2nd, or 3rd....) - years ago I had a false positive. the definitions were "fixed" on the next download, 24 hours, not the 24 months that Norton takes.....

and as for Microsoft - the folks that brought you the original attack prone operating system.... - I would not trust their product for anything. next week Microsoft will be offering a free scan service for 'extraordinary threats' that got past them, but $75 for removal of "stuff we found"

these are the folks that spend years developing Vista - a "new secure" system - remember how Microsoft got beaten about the head & shoulders for its lack of "security?") - eventually produced User Account Control - which is an absolute joke - interferes with any normal user and fails to prevent pretty much of any recent day attacks. Vista bombed - has what? per reports - 17% of "the market" - Apple is pushing 10% or better....

ChowderMan said:

and as for Microsoft - the folks that brought you the original attack prone operating system.... - I would not trust their product for anything.

Click to expand...

That's my problem - I don't trust Microsoft. I do use their operating system, but not Internet Explorer, Outlook, etc. They are notorious for leaving back doors that allow anyone, including them, to exploit your system.

I just heard about Avira last weekend and heard great things about it. Do you use the free version, Chowder?

The original attack prone machine would be Apple if it was a larger player in the total world wide market. If one takes the time to write a virus you would do it to cause damage so why bother with a very small market share. Now Apples aren't virus proof by any stretch as any operating system can be taken out under some conditions.

Now I know a little about computers and what will run as well as what won't. I'm not running both by the way as most won't even install with another virus checker installed regardless but this one did. I have AVG for years and will keep it a bit longer.

AVG here, too, Joe.

I used AVG for several years until I discovered the hard way last spring that the free version didn't have anti-root kit. (I should have paid for the full version - it's reasonable and good software.) Anyway, I found Avast, which had anti-root kit in it's free version. I'm pretty sure they all have that protection now in the free version.

Anti-root???
Root????

Huh?

Well I have the full paid for package for 4 machines with AVG and have for years now. Never had a virus problem since I started using it and I also have the full firewall by them as well.

I use the free version and haven't had a virus problem ever. I use XP Pro's built in firewall.

chowhound said:

Anti-root???
Root????

Huh?

Click to expand...

(I just like saying root. And tool. And sac. And.....well, you get the picture.)

I'm running XP Pro on my 3 machines all of which I use to run my business. I like the features in the AVG firewall better than MS though it is fairly decent firewall. AVG just has more control as to what comes in and goes out. I also run almost exclusive MS products from IE to Outlook and Outlook Express. I run my business with Microsoft Office XP Developers as well with the business package I wrote for it in Access. The software for my buisness runs about $3K up which I did for the price of the Office package. Oh and 99% of the type of software I wrote is also done in Access database systems.

chowhound said:

I use the free version and haven't had a virus problem ever. I use XP Pro's built in firewall.

Click to expand...

anti-virus and firewalls are two _entirely_ separate things.

use both; using one is not a substitute for using the other.

>>root kits
get a stiff scotch, go forth and google. things you'd really rather not know about.

ChowderMan said:

anti-virus and firewalls are two _entirely_ separate things.

use both; using one is not a substitute for using the other.

>>root kits
get a stiff scotch, go forth and google. things you'd really rather not know about.

Click to expand...

Yes they are. Joe said what he used. I said what I used. For both.

I suppose it might be good, but nothing is ever free from Microsoft ... at least not for long. I predict they'll get you hooked and then cut back the free version to bare bones and offer to sell fulll protection. Sorry, I just do not trust them.
I like AVG and AVast free versions.

Doc said:

I suppose it might be good, but nothing is ever free from Microsoft ... at least not for long. I predict they'll get you hooked and then cut back the free version to bare bones and offer to sell fulll protection. Sorry, I just do not trust them.
I like AVG and AVast free versions.

Click to expand...

It is funny you mention that, I hear that some form of office is going to be coming out free in the near future. I was going through some tech sites this morning and I saw quite a few very good articles giving MSE very good marks. I am a bit hesitant with Microshaft, but they seem to be changing the way they were doing things. Windows 7 is also getting some good marks, but after that vista mess there is only one way to go.

You know I've always though a lot about Microsoft's efforts to give good software for a great price. I mean when I started software was dedicated to what ever machine you had and along came MS with DOS. At that point the PC became open architecture (except apple of course) so the prices really came down. MS gave use free browsers, mail readers as well as basic software to start with out of the box in their OS. All in all it sounds like a pretty good thing to me. I just have never understood the dislike for them as a company over all. Now deal with some of the others out there like I have you might find a reason to dislike some software companies.

You've been using Microsoft's beta release?

Microsoft's terminology is vastly different than the rest of the industry. Microsoft sells its beta products (Vista) for years before it's ready for public use. If it really sucks (M.E) They prepare a replacement product offer it at full retail. If a product proves to be successful and well liked, they discontinue it and end support.

Lefty said:

I am a bit hesitant with Microshaft, but they seem to be changing the way they were doing things.

Click to expand...

I agree with you here, Lefty. As JoeC points out, MS has given us some amazing software that has truly changed the way we do everything. They have made some big mistakes, particularly in their business practices, and it's cost them. But Windows and MS Office is still found on most of the computers in this country. I think they are trying to repair their business reputation, as well as make up for Vista with Windows 7.

Personally, I admire Bill Gates greatly for his genius as well as his philanthropy. And I'm running Windows on both of my computers. But I still consider carefully any Microsoft product because of their past security issues.

Fisher's Mom said:

Tell us what you think after you test it for a while, Lefty. There is a lot of nasty malware out there right now, and some of it even gets past the filters in web-mail and Thunderbird now. I've been using Avast, Spy-Bot, Ad-Aware, Malwarebyte and CrapCleaner to try and keep my system clean.

Click to expand...

It found a few things AntiVir had caught. So far I am liking it.

A couple of articles to read on the subject are linked below. Although CNET's reviewers liked the program as compared to other freebies, they noted that it's slower than other security software. Also, one poster noted following deficiencies in the program:Here are the links:

Article
Review

I'm shopping for a security suite. It just seems to be a good idea to run an integrated firewall, anti-virus, anti-phish, and so on.

After reading about AVG in these forums I figured I would give it a try so I downloaded the full featured trialware version.

Nope. It's not going to cut it.

I'll preface this by stating I run XP Pro fully updated from a user account. For me it seems foolish to run a computer from a 'user account' with any kind of admin privileges.

First thing I noticed was all the sites I set to 'remember me' didn't. That's a minor inconvenience.

Then I regularly go to two particular sites that require Java. I go to the site, I get the 'allow Java' window, I click allow all. If I close and reopen the browser I get the pop up again. ABut I allowed it ... ? Whiskey Tango ... Didn't I just allow it?

On this other site I keep getting the 'allow Java' thing, I have to authorize this one. But first thing that runs is a 'browser comparability' pop up. So now I'm wondering if the same 'thing' signing me out of sites (not allowing a setting of a persistant cookie) is is getting me this damned comparability pop up.

But the best one is, when I open my browser I get a warning that there has been a tracking cookie set / AVG has detected a tracking cookie. How did that cookie get set in the first place? Especially since I have to log into every site?

I've gone through all the little icons on the user interface and havent found where to allow certain things, Mayhaps it's because I'm in a user account with restricted privileges doesn't give me the menus. OTOH if I have the ability to allow things to run I should be able to set the permissions.

Overall, except for AVG allowing a cookie to be set that it later warns me about (which really IS horseshit if you think about it), AVG seems competent but also an annoyance.

On a side note I've used/tried suites with training wheels (norton and McAfee) to BitDefender (somewhat Geeky) to both Zone Alarms, the stand alone and the suite. So I have some idea how these things are suppose to work and how to configure them.

I run from a single user on all my machines with the full suite installed. I'm running AVG 8.0 with no problem with anything. As for cookies not a problem with remembering where I go as I use IE8's functions to handle cookies. I've been running AVG now for about 10 years, starting with the free version and now the Full Internet Suite for 6 years. I pay for 3 licenses every two years. Oh and I've never had problem running as a single user with full admin abilities since I've been on the internet (since it became available with dial up).

>>I'm shopping for a security suite. It just seems to be a good idea to run an integrated firewall, anti-virus, anti-phish, and so on.

might want to rethink that approach. each of the "suites" has it's strong points, but few - actually none,,,, - perform really superb in the overall.

firewalls: first, if your machines are behind a router - fairly common in today's homes with some machines wired, some wireless, you almost don't need a software firewall. almost, I don't recommend it. XP/Vista firewall is more than adequate. the router is a hardware firewall not much of anything gets past. frankly, I'd put a router between my pc and the internet whether or not it was "needed"

pfishing: many browsers provide that inherent capability. IE is a bit of a "hog" - i.e. noticeable delays when moving site to site, but others - like FireFox - provide pfishing and mal-site warnings with virtually no noticeable impact on browsing.

email protection: this entire 'function' is a case of the emperor's new clothes. real-time anti-virus protection monitors any code that wants to run on the machine - regardless of whether it wants to run from a browser or an email. the same engine and virus definitions that protect 'your pc' are used to check email. so, question: does it make a difference if the nastygram is detected before or after you click on it? if you're in the habit of opening and clicking on every spam email and every link within every spam email, maybe. but that's just a maybe because if the anti-virus engine / definitions didn't flag it on 'attempt to run' they're not likely to have flagged it when you downloaded / opened your email either.

the "doesn't remember me" type things sure sounds like some 'suite' that is convinced it knows more than you do, all users are idiots, and overrides anything you tell your computer to do. specifically, sounds like a cookie thing. same with Java; user permission to run / not run is over-ridden because "they" know better. call it third party user account control....

ChowderMan said:

might want to rethink that approach. each of the "suites" has it's strong points, but few - actually none,,,, - perform really superb in the overall.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I cross my fingers and hope the programmers and developers have 'it all' work together, mayhaps I expect too much.

firewalls: first, if your machines are behind a router - ..the router is a hardware firewall not much of anything gets past... you almost don't need a software firewall. almost, I don't recommend it.

Click to expand...

I had a router for that reason, it died.

Since when behind a router (hardware firewall) everything is coming from a router how does the software firewall know its something 'bad' that got through the router (or would the answer make my eyes glaze?)?

What I've heard about XPs firewall is something inside the machine calls out it's allowed out.

(other stuff is interesting but this post could get too long)

the "doesn't remember me" type things sure sounds like some 'suite' that is convinced it knows more than you do, all users are idiots, and overrides anything you tell your computer to do. specifically, sounds like a cookie thing. same with Java; user permission to run / not run is over-ridden because "they" know better. call it third party user account control....

Click to expand...

Some people want that. Geez ... People with dSLRs never taking the camera off automatic ... the guy in England (?) who drove up a cow path and almost off a cliff (good thing there was a fence) because thats where his GPS Atlas told him to go ... third party control which absolves the user/ operator of thought seems to be the wave of the future.


Anyhow, two nights ago I tried sending mail to a classmate using Thunderbird set up for my EDU account, it came back as undeliverable to a mail account I keep at my web site, AND to one of my Road Runner mail accounts, AND to Wifes Road Runner account, and none of those accounts are connected to my EDU account except for their being on the same machine.

So I look at the headers to see it's routing ... 127.0.0.1 .... thats it. Never made it past the loop back.

So AVG is pooched, or somehow something malicious was allowed into my machine.

a firewall monitors incoming and outgoing traffic to "the net" - it blocks either incoming packets or outgoing packets as specified by its settings.

on the incoming side, a firewall prevents cretins from "pinging" your computer. if they find an open/vulnerable port, it is entirely possible to 'download' nasty stuff onto the pc without your knowledge. if your machine is "connected on-line" all the time (DSL or cable for example) it's a very good safeguard.

a bit oversimplified, but the router works because (a) it's a real "dumb terminal" - responds to no pings (almost....) and (b) it does it's magic keeping stuff "out" by "knowing" the pc didn't ask for it. pc no ask, incoming packets not going anywhere. hardware 'firewalls' ie routers - are a lot harder - "nearly not possible" - to get past (for wireless, _presuming!_ it's not using the factory default name&password. the crookie cretins know all of those....)

on the outgoing side a firewall can restrict any and all outgoing requests to "permitted applications." when Adobe - for example - wants to go automatically check for updates, you can set the firewall to block it.


>>how does the software firewall know its something 'bad' that got through the router
sorry, missed that. answer: because it's a Microsoft product - and they never - except once a month - make mistakes.
and sounds like it's blocking Thunderbird....


anti-virus software is an entirely different kettle of fish. to be effective it has to monitor all computer code that wants to load into RAM and execute - verifying the computer code "looks okay." that's not as easy as it sounds.

the new suites monitor every bit and byte as you download it and for example the same checking for emails as they download and with all the attachments.

when not well done, all that overhead leaves you holding the short end of the glue pot stick - everything bogs down. let's say you splurged and bought 2 gigs of RAM- if the anti-virus program eats up 1.5 gigs to run, and it's _always_ running.... not much RAM left to use.

if you read the reviews, you'll see stuff like 'the new version is less intrusive, has a lighter footprint, it's less resource intensive' etc etc etc. even the big names have had their issues with reducing spiffy new computers to glue machines. so while it _sounds_ like a really neat thing that the anti-virus "do all" suite will alert you "as it is downloading" - what is the value in knowing "that" "then" vs knowing "if/when you touch it"?

if you get a email spam with a nastygram encoded in the jpg, and you see it's spam and just delete it, was it of any value to have "YOU'VE GOT (infected) SPAM!" pushed in your face as it downloaded?

>>mayhaps I expect too much.
not at all. it's just that one doesn't always get what one hopes for, regardless of expectations [g]