Microsoft Security Essentials Fails Certification Again
Microsoft's security suite has failed AV-TEST certification for a second time in a row.
At the end of November, German anti-virus lab AV-TEST published the results of tests conducted with twenty-four of the latest anti-virus programs for home users. Twenty-three products received AV-TEST certification when used with Windows 7, but Microsoft's own Security Essentials suite failed. Now two months later, the suite has failed certification again.
The lab publishes tests results every two months, and for this latest installment for November and December, the firm evaluated 25 consumer antivirus security programs. This time around, Microsoft Security Essentials 4.1 wasn't the only one to fail certification, as it was joined by PC Tools Internet Security 2012 and AhnLab Internet Security 8.0.
According to the results, Microsoft Security Essentials 4.1 scored a 1.5 out of 6.0 in the Protection category, caused by its lower-than-average protection against 0-day malware attacks, inclusive of web and e-mail threats (Real-World Testing). Its detection of a "representative set of malware discovered in the last 2-3 months" was also lower than the industry average.
In the Repair department, Microsoft Security Essentials 4.1 scored a 3.0 out of 6.0. The suite's ability to remove all active components of widespread malware (including Rootkits and stealth malware) fell under the industry average, and its ability to detect actively running widespread malware (including Rootkits and stealth malware) also fell under the industry standard.
What's surprising here is that Microsoft Security Essentials has failed again. After all, it's deemed as the most popular security suite not only in North America, but across the world because (1) it's free and (2) it's native to the Windows platform. That said, Microsoft's in-house security suite should be at the top of the certification ranks, not along the bottom with the failures.
Dave Forstrom, director of Trustworthy Computing for Microsoft, responded to a query from CNET about the double failure. Unsurprisingly, he didn't offer any reasons as to why the software failed two consecutive certification tests.
"Microsoft believes in a defense in-depth strategy for antimalware protection that includes using Microsoft Security Essentials / Windows Defender in tandem with other appropriate security features such as SmartScreen, as well as keeping all software up-to-date," he wrote. "Our antimalware engine is designed to work in concert with these Microsoft security features to create a comprehensive security strategy. Microsoft focuses its protection efforts on what affects our customers, using real-world data collected from more than 600 million systems worldwide. We weigh these samples by severity and prevalence of malware in the wild."
Cnet points out that Microsoft Security Essentials 4.1 missed certification by a whole point in the recent certification test, a lower score than the previous failure when Microsoft missed certification by half a point.
To see the AV-TEST score for November and December, head here.
With that said, I use Avast!.
How this merits a 1.6/6 is absolutely beyond me. It makes it appear that it fails to catch over 70 percent of all viruses with that ranking.
Oh well, whatever keeps the paid support calls coming in, huh MS?
That is a bit confusing and may lead to MSE users downloading Defender. As I understand it you don't run Security Essensial and Defender together.
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/protect/forum/mse-protect_start/windows-defender-and-microsoft-security-essentials/5309cb8d-02e1-40e8-974f-0dcedb9ab9fd
I don't quite understand how they can "fail" MSE but give Bloaton 360 a big ol green checkmark. In my opinion McAfee and Norton should be completely overhauled and re-introduced to the market. Symantec makes good tools, but their AV suite needs some fat trimmed.
With that said, I use Avast!.
How this merits a 1.6/6 is absolutely beyond me. It makes it appear that it fails to catch over 70 percent of all viruses with that ranking.
Let's consider what kind of people would save money by using a free antivirus vs. paid. If you pay for antivirus you are most likely more wealthy and either care more about your computer, or are too busy making and/or spending said money to spend time on the computer.
If you're using free antivirus, then you're either hard up, which means most likely you will be spending more time at home due to lack of job or do not want to go out because that usually means spending money. more time on the computer means more chance of an infection.
I'm not saying that paid antiviruses are not more effective than free antiviruses. I'm simply pointing out you're making a very narrow statement on a very expansive subject.
The people who always have problems never update, download torrentz, go on questionable websites, etc. AV software is like a seatbelt, it makes the crash less severe it doesn't prevent it.
Yet Windows Defender sucks up my laptop's hard drive's read performance. As soon as I run it, playing TF2 or watching a movie turns into a MACRO-stuttering fest.
AVG Free on the otherhand does the scanning job within 30 minutes, and only causes a slight FPS drop in TF2.
And sometimes, even the AV isn't updated...
My dad still uses Windows xp SP2, Macromedia Flash 7 (I think), Java 6, and McAfee OAS 2007.
He refuses to update to SP3 because he thinks it's a virus. How funny and sad at the same time...
That's funny, In the same time frame, most of the people i know that get virus didn't even have AV to begin with or have an expired Norton/Mcafee. (which both is crap even when working IMO).
After i've installed MS SE on their computer, I haven't seen those computers come back to me to be cleaned.
Of course I also try to educate people on how to reduce the chances of getting another virus because No Matter What AV you chose, you always have a chance to get a virus that will wreck your computer.
I like ddpruitt response on comparing AV to a seatbelt.
Using no security since 2000.
Malware Hunting with the Sysinternals Tools: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wuy_Pm3KaV8