Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #121003 > unrolled thread

Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole security/av protection?

Started by	Arlen Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com>
First post	2020-08-30 20:03 +0000
Last post	2020-09-02 16:52 -0700
Articles	15 — 8 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10

#121003 — Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole security/av protection?

From	Arlen Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com>
Date	2020-08-30 20:03 +0000
Subject	Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole security/av protection?
Message-ID	<rih0ml$bae$3@news.mixmin.net>

Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole 
security/av protection?

Checking just now, I see it's now called "Windows Security" I think:
o Win+I > Update and Security > Windows Security > [Open Windows Security]

I looked for a version but couldn't find that - but it did say this:
  No current threats.
  Last scan: 8/30/2020 9:25 PM (quick scan)
  0 threats found
  Scan lasted 1 minutes 25 seconds
  38578 files scanned

In a recent thread, someone lamented that Office 2007 wasn't updated, where 
I commented that the functionality for a casual home user is the same on 
any Office version, and, that I had not had a virus in decades if security 
was the issue.

Then I got to thinking _why_ (to my knowledge) I haven't had a virus in 
decades, and I don't really know why, particularly since I install hundreds 
of freeware apps and therefore consider myself a freeware junkie.

Maybe Windows Defender actually works? 
o Dunno.

I never thought about it all that much, so this question comes to mind to 
ask you, whether your _sole_ AV/security program is Windows Defender.

Is it?

Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole 
security/av protection?
-- 
Usenet is a wonderful way to get setup opinions from around the world.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#121024

From	boB <boB@K7IQ.com>
Date	2020-08-31 00:12 -0700
Message-ID	<ek8pkftlig1s723loglk5d0ual87vj767e@4ax.com>
In reply to	#121003

On Sun, 30 Aug 2020 20:03:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen   Holder
<arlen_holder@newmachines.com> wrote:

>Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole 
>security/av protection?
>
>Checking just now, I see it's now called "Windows Security" I think:
>o Win+I > Update and Security > Windows Security > [Open Windows Security]
>
>I looked for a version but couldn't find that - but it did say this:
>  No current threats.
>  Last scan: 8/30/2020 9:25 PM (quick scan)
>  0 threats found
>  Scan lasted 1 minutes 25 seconds
>  38578 files scanned
>
>In a recent thread, someone lamented that Office 2007 wasn't updated, where 
>I commented that the functionality for a casual home user is the same on 
>any Office version, and, that I had not had a virus in decades if security 
>was the issue.
>
>Then I got to thinking _why_ (to my knowledge) I haven't had a virus in 
>decades, and I don't really know why, particularly since I install hundreds 
>of freeware apps and therefore consider myself a freeware junkie.
>
>Maybe Windows Defender actually works? 
>o Dunno.
>
>I never thought about it all that much, so this question comes to mind to 
>ask you, whether your _sole_ AV/security program is Windows Defender.
>
>Is it?
>
>Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole 
>security/av protection?


I used only Defender for quite a while like you and I think that it
actually DOES work.  And it is normally fairly inocuous.

I need to  disable it sometimes though to copy files.

boB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121025

From	Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>
Date	2020-08-31 22:09 +1200
Message-ID	<8tipkfpcmm0c3efn8enn410cgp7l9f4qp1@4ax.com>
In reply to	#121003

On Sun, 30 Aug 2020 20:03:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen   Holder
<arlen_holder@newmachines.com> wrote:

>Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole 
>security/av protection?

I've used antivirus software from almost the beginning. I continued
that practice even though Microsoft introduced their own. The only
virus infection I have had occurred in the late 1990s when I was using
Panda. It might have found its way through but their help in getting
rid of it was first class. I'm currently using Kaspersky (again).
-- 

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121029

From	Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
Date	2020-08-31 14:28 +0000
Message-ID	<rij1ed$jhl$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#121025

Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2020 20:03:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen   Holder
> <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> wrote:
> 
>> Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole 
>> security/av protection?
> 
> I've used antivirus software from almost the beginning. I continued
> that practice even though Microsoft introduced their own. The only
> virus infection I have had occurred in the late 1990s when I was using
> Panda. It might have found its way through but their help in getting
> rid of it was first class. I'm currently using Kaspersky (again).

At work we always used to have McAfee enforced on us, but for the last few
years we've not had anything. For those using windows they only moved to
win10 this year or perhaps end of last year. They were on win7 prior to
that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121048

From	Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>
Date	2020-09-01 12:59 +1200
Message-ID	<p17rkfpdfhhkaj8preb7pah9b1njfil6l7@4ax.com>
In reply to	#121029

On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 14:28:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2020 20:03:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen   Holder
>> <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole 
>>> security/av protection?
>> 
>> I've used antivirus software from almost the beginning. I continued
>> that practice even though Microsoft introduced their own. The only
>> virus infection I have had occurred in the late 1990s when I was using
>> Panda. It might have found its way through but their help in getting
>> rid of it was first class. I'm currently using Kaspersky (again).
>
>At work we always used to have McAfee enforced on us, but for the last few
>years we've not had anything. For those using windows they only moved to
>win10 this year or perhaps end of last year. They were on win7 prior to
>that. 

McAfee came with one of my machines and I used it for several years
across several machines. I got rid of it earlier in the year because I
could no longer stand their business practices, particularly their
billing. They even succeeded in billing my bank via an expired credit
card for a license I had intentionally let lapse. I don't like having
to count my fingers every time I shake hands.
-- 

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121059

From	Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
Date	2020-09-01 07:05 +0000
Message-ID	<rikrrn$1jq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#121048

Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 14:28:29 -0000 (UTC), Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2020 20:03:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen   Holder
>>> <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole 
>>>> security/av protection?
>>> 
>>> I've used antivirus software from almost the beginning. I continued
>>> that practice even though Microsoft introduced their own. The only
>>> virus infection I have had occurred in the late 1990s when I was using
>>> Panda. It might have found its way through but their help in getting
>>> rid of it was first class. I'm currently using Kaspersky (again).
>> 
>> At work we always used to have McAfee enforced on us, but for the last few
>> years we've not had anything. For those using windows they only moved to
>> win10 this year or perhaps end of last year. They were on win7 prior to
>> that. 
> 
> McAfee came with one of my machines and I used it for several years
> across several machines. I got rid of it earlier in the year because I
> could no longer stand their business practices, particularly their
> billing. They even succeeded in billing my bank via an expired credit
> card for a license I had intentionally let lapse. I don't like having
> to count my fingers every time I shake hands.

I hated it because the on-demand scanner was so slow. Downloading stuff and
launching newly installed programs took minutes longer than necessary. I
could disable it for a while but every hour it re-enabled itself.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121087

From	MajorLanGod <lonelydad58@gmail.com>
Date	2020-09-01 17:56 +0000
Message-ID	<XnsAC2B839B01612MajorLanGodyahoocom@69.16.179.29>
In reply to	#121003

Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> wrote in
news:rih0ml$bae$3@news.mixmin.net: 

> Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole
> security/av protection?
> 
> Checking just now, I see it's now called "Windows Security" I think:
> o Win+I > Update and Security > Windows Security > [Open Windows
> Security] 
> 
> I looked for a version but couldn't find that - but it did say this:
>   No current threats.
>   Last scan: 8/30/2020 9:25 PM (quick scan)
>   0 threats found
>   Scan lasted 1 minutes 25 seconds
>   38578 files scanned
> 
> In a recent thread, someone lamented that Office 2007 wasn't updated,
> where I commented that the functionality for a casual home user is the
> same on any Office version, and, that I had not had a virus in decades
> if security was the issue.
> 
> Then I got to thinking _why_ (to my knowledge) I haven't had a virus
> in decades, and I don't really know why, particularly since I install
> hundreds of freeware apps and therefore consider myself a freeware
> junkie. 
> 
> Maybe Windows Defender actually works? 
> o Dunno.
> 
> I never thought about it all that much, so this question comes to mind
> to ask you, whether your _sole_ AV/security program is Windows
> Defender. 
> 
> Is it?
> 
> Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole
> security/av protection?
I use (and pay for) Malwarebytes for the extras it offers like protection 
from rootkits and other things that Windows Defender doesn't offer 
(TTBOMK)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121127

From	Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>
Date	2020-09-02 14:41 +1200
Message-ID	<7h1ukf1v4k5d1n3ikt37v75kd7r7jgiqtq@4ax.com>
In reply to	#121087

On Tue, 01 Sep 2020 17:56:15 GMT, MajorLanGod <lonelydad58@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Arlen   Holder <arlen_holder@newmachines.com> wrote in
>news:rih0ml$bae$3@news.mixmin.net: 
>
>> Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole
>> security/av protection?
>> 
>> Checking just now, I see it's now called "Windows Security" I think:
>> o Win+I > Update and Security > Windows Security > [Open Windows
>> Security] 
>> 
>> I looked for a version but couldn't find that - but it did say this:
>>   No current threats.
>>   Last scan: 8/30/2020 9:25 PM (quick scan)
>>   0 threats found
>>   Scan lasted 1 minutes 25 seconds
>>   38578 files scanned
>> 
>> In a recent thread, someone lamented that Office 2007 wasn't updated,
>> where I commented that the functionality for a casual home user is the
>> same on any Office version, and, that I had not had a virus in decades
>> if security was the issue.
>> 
>> Then I got to thinking _why_ (to my knowledge) I haven't had a virus
>> in decades, and I don't really know why, particularly since I install
>> hundreds of freeware apps and therefore consider myself a freeware
>> junkie. 
>> 
>> Maybe Windows Defender actually works? 
>> o Dunno.
>> 
>> I never thought about it all that much, so this question comes to mind
>> to ask you, whether your _sole_ AV/security program is Windows
>> Defender. 
>> 
>> Is it?
>> 
>> Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole
>> security/av protection?

>I use (and pay for) Malwarebytes for the extras it offers like protection 
>from rootkits and other things that Windows Defender doesn't offer 
>(TTBOMK)

When I installed Kaspersky it asked me to uninstall Malwarebytes.
Apparently they clash in some way.

-- 

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121132

From	Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>
Date	2020-09-02 00:54 -0400
Message-ID	<rin8h6$6me$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#121127

Eric Stevens wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Sep 2020 17:56:15 GMT, MajorLanGod <lonelydad58@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I use (and pay for) Malwarebytes for the extras it offers like protection 
>>from rootkits and other things that Windows Defender doesn't offer 
>> (TTBOMK)
> 
> When I installed Kaspersky it asked me to uninstall Malwarebytes.
> Apparently they clash in some way.

AV programs are set up to complain, if a second "real time protection"
AV is running.

The paid version of Malwarebytes is "real time protection".
The 14 day trial version of Malwarebytes is "real time protection".
But the free version of Malwarebytes is "on-demand scanner", and
for those, there is no complaint.

After the 14 day trial, Malwarebytes removes its "I'm a real time protection
program" flag, then Malwarebytes reverts to being "on-demand scans only".

If you have too many Real Time protection programs, the I/O
on the machine gets slower and slower, the more of them that
are present. They take turns reading the file in a sense
(each could be implemented as a stacked filter driver,
so that data read from disk, is passed through each filter
as each one gets a chance to scan the data).

As an example of what the penalty for real time scanning
is like, if I run hashdeep64 (a recursive checksum program
that generates checksums for the entire partition), it runs
at one seventh the normal rate if Windows Defender is
doing real time scanning. If it normally ran at 98MB/sec
on WinXP, it would run at 14MB/sec on Windows 10. If you're doing
something I/O intensive, the penalty adds up. Imagine two or three
real time scanner programs doing that while you're running hashdeep64.

And there's only so much that buying a faster ("5GHz") CPU can do.
Some of the processes insist on all hogging a single core,
so it's not even a matter of "buying a 64 core processor to fix it".
Even that would not help. The ability of software people to waste
resources, is much better than the ability of the hardware guys
to make faster hardware.

Your NVMe drive can't help you, on CPU-bound behavior cases.
Such as scanning the crap out of every small file you access
on the drive.

If the guys developing software were given slower computers,
we would get better "more efficient" software :-) It's because
they all got 18 core HP computers with 64GB of memory, that
everything they write, stinks.

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121222

From	"wasbit" <wasbitremove@hotmail.com>
Date	2020-09-03 09:39 +0100
Message-ID	<riqa4f$3qm$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#121132

"Paul" <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote in message 
news:rin8h6$6me$1@dont-email.me...
> Eric Stevens wrote:
>> On Tue, 01 Sep 2020 17:56:15 GMT, MajorLanGod <lonelydad58@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I use (and pay for) Malwarebytes for the extras it offers like 
>>> protection from rootkits and other things that Windows Defender doesn't 
>>> offer (TTBOMK)
>>
>> When I installed Kaspersky it asked me to uninstall Malwarebytes.
>> Apparently they clash in some way.
>
> AV programs are set up to complain, if a second "real time protection"
> AV is running.
>
> The paid version of Malwarebytes is "real time protection".
> The 14 day trial version of Malwarebytes is "real time protection".
> But the free version of Malwarebytes is "on-demand scanner", and
> for those, there is no complaint.
>
> After the 14 day trial, Malwarebytes removes its "I'm a real time 
> protection
> program" flag, then Malwarebytes reverts to being "on-demand scans only".
>
> If you have too many Real Time protection programs, the I/O
> on the machine gets slower and slower, the more of them that
> are present. They take turns reading the file in a sense
> (each could be implemented as a stacked filter driver,
> so that data read from disk, is passed through each filter
> as each one gets a chance to scan the data).
>
> As an example of what the penalty for real time scanning
> is like, if I run hashdeep64 (a recursive checksum program
> that generates checksums for the entire partition), it runs
> at one seventh the normal rate if Windows Defender is
> doing real time scanning. If it normally ran at 98MB/sec
> on WinXP, it would run at 14MB/sec on Windows 10. If you're doing
> something I/O intensive, the penalty adds up. Imagine two or three
> real time scanner programs doing that while you're running hashdeep64.
>
> And there's only so much that buying a faster ("5GHz") CPU can do.
> Some of the processes insist on all hogging a single core,
> so it's not even a matter of "buying a 64 core processor to fix it".
> Even that would not help. The ability of software people to waste
> resources, is much better than the ability of the hardware guys
> to make faster hardware.
>
> Your NVMe drive can't help you, on CPU-bound behavior cases.
> Such as scanning the crap out of every small file you access
> on the drive.
>
> If the guys developing software were given slower computers,
> we would get better "more efficient" software :-) It's because
> they all got 18 core HP computers with 64GB of memory, that
> everything they write, stinks.
>

+1

-- 
Regards
wasbit

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121159

From	Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com>
Date	2020-09-02 08:10 -0700
Message-ID	<hr9qv3Ff4mlU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#121127

On 9/1/2020 7:41 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

> When I installed Kaspersky it asked me to uninstall Malwarebytes.
> Apparently they clash in some way.

I no longer run Kaspersky, but I used to. When I installed it, I had 
MalwareBytes AntiMalware installed, but Kaspersky did *not* ask me to 
uninstall it. They ran together without a problem for a couple of years.

-- 
Ken

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121162

From	Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>
Date	2020-09-02 11:54 -0400
Message-ID	<riof6j$n4i$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#121159

Ken Blake wrote:
> On 9/1/2020 7:41 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
> 
>> When I installed Kaspersky it asked me to uninstall Malwarebytes.
>> Apparently they clash in some way.
> 
> 
> 
> I no longer run Kaspersky, but I used to. When I installed it, I had 
> MalwareBytes AntiMalware installed, but Kaspersky did *not* ask me to 
> uninstall it. They ran together without a problem for a couple of years.

Was this perhaps, in the interval during which MBAM was solely
an "on-demand" scanner. There was a time, when that's all it did,
and there was no Pro version.

Their previous business plan, did not include "real-time protection".

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121176

From	Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com>
Date	2020-09-02 11:21 -0700
Message-ID	<hra65aFhdbkU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#121162

On 9/2/2020 8:54 AM, Paul wrote:
> Ken Blake wrote:
>> On 9/1/2020 7:41 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
>> 
>>> When I installed Kaspersky it asked me to uninstall Malwarebytes.
>>> Apparently they clash in some way.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I no longer run Kaspersky, but I used to. When I installed it, I had 
>> MalwareBytes AntiMalware installed, but Kaspersky did *not* ask me to 
>> uninstall it. They ran together without a problem for a couple of years.
> 
> Was this perhaps, in the interval during which MBAM was solely
> an "on-demand" scanner. There was a time, when that's all it did,
> and there was no Pro version.


I'm not sure, but I don't think so. I stopped using Kaspersky just a 
couple of months ago. When was that interval?


> Their previous business plan, did not include "real-time protection".


-- 
Ken

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121188

From	Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>
Date	2020-09-02 17:49 -0400
Message-ID	<rip417$3as$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#121176

Ken Blake wrote:
> On 9/2/2020 8:54 AM, Paul wrote:
>> Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On 9/1/2020 7:41 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
>>>
>>>> When I installed Kaspersky it asked me to uninstall Malwarebytes.
>>>> Apparently they clash in some way.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I no longer run Kaspersky, but I used to. When I installed it, I had 
>>> MalwareBytes AntiMalware installed, but Kaspersky did *not* ask me to 
>>> uninstall it. They ran together without a problem for a couple of years.
>>
>> Was this perhaps, in the interval during which MBAM was solely
>> an "on-demand" scanner. There was a time, when that's all it did,
>> and there was no Pro version.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure, but I don't think so. I stopped using Kaspersky just a 
> couple of months ago. When was that interval?

It's had the possibility of Read Time protection for a few years at least.

Then perhaps your MBAM was still in Free Mode. Kaspersky
should not complain about that.

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#121201

From	Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com>
Date	2020-09-02 16:52 -0700
Message-ID	<hraphjFlbb9U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#121188

On 9/2/2020 2:49 PM, Paul wrote:
> Ken Blake wrote:
>> On 9/2/2020 8:54 AM, Paul wrote:
>>> Ken Blake wrote:
>>>> On 9/1/2020 7:41 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When I installed Kaspersky it asked me to uninstall Malwarebytes.
>>>>> Apparently they clash in some way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I no longer run Kaspersky, but I used to. When I installed it, I had 
>>>> MalwareBytes AntiMalware installed, but Kaspersky did *not* ask me to 
>>>> uninstall it. They ran together without a problem for a couple of years.
>>>
>>> Was this perhaps, in the interval during which MBAM was solely
>>> an "on-demand" scanner. There was a time, when that's all it did,
>>> and there was no Pro version.
>> 
>> 
>> I'm not sure, but I don't think so. I stopped using Kaspersky just a 
>> couple of months ago. When was that interval?
> 
> It's had the possibility of Read Time protection for a few years at least.
> 
> Then perhaps your MBAM was still in Free Mode. Kaspersky
> should not complain about that.


Yes, that could be.


-- 
Ken

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

csiph-web

Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole security/av protection?

Contents

#121003 — Do you use the native default Windows 10 Windows Defender as your sole security/av protection?

#121024

#121025

#121029

#121048

#121059

#121087

#121127

#121132

#121222

#121159

#121162

#121176

#121188

#121201