Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Bitdefender Says Windows Defender is Better Than Nothing

By - Source: Bitdefender | B 46 comments

Windows Defender is better than nothing, says security firm Bitdefender.

Security firm Bitdefender recently conducted a study with Windows 8 and its built-in Windows Defender sotfware and discovered that they're able to defeat 85-percent of the 100 malware families used by most hackers in 2012. That's better than Windows 7's out-of-the-box security which reportedly only blocks 32-percent of the malware.

Bitdefender came to this conclusion after setting up a Windows 8 machine, with Windows Defender running, in a controlled test environment. The company infected the machine with "61 malware threats of 385 of the most popular malware samples."

According to the firm, one of the samples managed to sneak past Windows Defender, but crashed on execution. Another sample broke through Windows Defender and actually executed, but it was immediately blocked by User Account Control so no actual payload was unloaded.

"The malicious sample set consisted of the families of malware detected most frequently in the past six months by the Bitdefender Real-Time Virus Reporting System," the company said on Friday. "The malware that successfully bypassed Windows Defender was capable of granting backdoor access to the system, intercepting keystrokes, stealing online games credentials, and more."

When the company tested the Windows 8 machine without Windows Defender running, the results were naturally a lot worse. Of the 385 samples, 234 ran successfully, the company said, but an additional 138 samples just could not be executed on the machine for numerous unnamed reasons. Six e-threats executed but then crashed, and seven others launched but their payload was blocked by User Account Control.

"As a means of protecting a computer from viruses, data theft and other type of malware, Windows Defender is better than nothing," said Bitdefender Chief Security Strategist Catalin Cosoi. "But it’s not a whole lot better. Most of the popular antivirus [solutions] can do better. The conclusion is clear: using your PC without a security solution is extremely risky."

Naturally this bit of information comes from a security firm that provides a 3rd-party solution, so take the data with a grain of salt.

 

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 46 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 23 Hide
    p05esto , November 12, 2012 4:32 PM
    TOMS: Take this STUPID advertisement down now! Your integrity is at stake here. This is comign from a firm that offers their own solution, it would be like running this article and saying the data came from Symantec or whatever. What a crock of crap.

    MSE (defender) is great stuff, is supoer fast and doesn't hog system resources. In my experience MSE is the best all arounnd solution and is built right into Windows Update. You really can't beat MSE and I bet most techies use the software.

    Again, take this BS biased article down NOW! Shame on your Toms for this biased bit of reporting
  • 22 Hide
    Anonymous , November 12, 2012 3:14 PM
    Naturally this is bs
  • 16 Hide
    Anonymous , November 12, 2012 3:59 PM
    Recently, I've been wondering how many viruses I've got after a year or so of running sans AV, so I downloaded avira free and did a full scan. It found 2 viruses, which were both reported false positives and as such, I uninstalled it.
    In my opinion, care and common sense can very well make up for the lack of an antivirus.
Other Comments
  • 22 Hide
    Anonymous , November 12, 2012 3:14 PM
    Naturally this is bs
  • -2 Hide
    dextermat , November 12, 2012 3:30 PM
    plus get rid of java and adobe flash and you'll be 99% free of malware!!
    If you don't download illegal music plus movies and you stay away from the naked ladies sites.
  • 16 Hide
    Anonymous , November 12, 2012 3:59 PM
    Recently, I've been wondering how many viruses I've got after a year or so of running sans AV, so I downloaded avira free and did a full scan. It found 2 viruses, which were both reported false positives and as such, I uninstalled it.
    In my opinion, care and common sense can very well make up for the lack of an antivirus.
  • 6 Hide
    Thomas Creel , November 12, 2012 4:00 PM
    We need people like this to go out and test these things, we will never be a step ahead of the hackers but we should keep trying anyways!
  • -8 Hide
    Anonymous , November 12, 2012 4:01 PM
    lol no, your pc is better of without it, and by that i mean with or without it you WILL get infected if there is something that can infect. but the application itself is so annoying itself so it isnt worth enabling.
  • 16 Hide
    therogerwilco , November 12, 2012 4:02 PM
    So perhaps they are saying we should go with BitDefender?
    Personally I goto quite a few shady sites, on Win7 Security Essentials never failed me, and so far on 8, it hasn't failed me.
    Besides, the one thing nobody ever talks about, is the simple fact that no anti-virus etc will EVER be 100%. Until NEW virus are found and put into a catalog, the anti-virus program doesn't know about it.
    Also, another reason I use Microsoft's AV etc, is because they KNOW windows. Google "mistake user32.dll flagged as virus bluescreen".
  • 7 Hide
    ojas , November 12, 2012 4:06 PM
    What about Win 7/8 x64 fully patched with MSE and Win Defender?
  • 2 Hide
    enzed , November 12, 2012 4:22 PM
    AV software at the consumer-level just seems like a money-grab in my opinion. I've never had an AV program on any of my personal PCs, and I have yet to run into any problems.
  • -7 Hide
    jisamaniac , November 12, 2012 4:31 PM
    Personally I use ClamAV. It's light weight, cloud-based, and scans incoming packets.
  • 23 Hide
    p05esto , November 12, 2012 4:32 PM
    TOMS: Take this STUPID advertisement down now! Your integrity is at stake here. This is comign from a firm that offers their own solution, it would be like running this article and saying the data came from Symantec or whatever. What a crock of crap.

    MSE (defender) is great stuff, is supoer fast and doesn't hog system resources. In my experience MSE is the best all arounnd solution and is built right into Windows Update. You really can't beat MSE and I bet most techies use the software.

    Again, take this BS biased article down NOW! Shame on your Toms for this biased bit of reporting
  • 2 Hide
    internetlad , November 12, 2012 4:41 PM
    I've been using MSE on my personal machine and I have no knowledge of any infection in recent memory. I had a couple of "blocked" messages in the past year, but few and far between.

    Using it as well on a machine at a small PC repair shop that we use to transfer data off infected computers and have noticed no ill effects on that unit either despite the fact that it's surrounded by malicious files in users' personal folders (downloads, most often)

    On the flip side of the coin, I know people who use their favorite flavour of AV (Norton, McAfee, and even some good ones like Kaspersky and Bitdefender) and get infected regularly (often in spans of 6 month periods) due simply to their user habits. There is no "end all" and "be all" to malicious software protection, it starts and ends with the user, everything else is simply precautionary, not bulletproof.

    In that case, 85% out of the box doesn't sound bad to me at all.
  • 3 Hide
    internetlad , November 12, 2012 4:45 PM
    Sorry for the double post, but after reading all the uninformed comments from people who have A) Not used Windows 8 and B) are referring to the Windows Defender included with Vista

    This is NOT the same flavour that was shipped with vista. This is essentially Microsoft Security Essentials with padding. Lightweight, and solid. Know what you're talking about before you bash a product due to your own pre-determinations and shortfalls.
  • 13 Hide
    Cryio , November 12, 2012 4:45 PM
    olafone of the most bloated proaducts out there... install it on a PC see it crawl to a halt...


    Yeah, if you use a Pentium 3.
  • 1 Hide
    lockhrt999 , November 12, 2012 4:57 PM
    Dorel44In my opinion, care and common sense can very well make up for the lack of an antivirus.


    Well said. AVs are not for geeks like us, they are there for blonde babes.
    No offence is intended.
  • 1 Hide
    smfrazz , November 12, 2012 5:03 PM
    therogerwilcoSo perhaps they are saying we should go with BitDefender?Personally I goto quite a few shady sites, on Win7 Security Essentials never failed me, and so far on 8, it hasn't failed me.Besides, the one thing nobody ever talks about, is the simple fact that no anti-virus etc will EVER be 100%. Until NEW virus are found and put into a catalog, the anti-virus program doesn't know about it.Also, another reason I use Microsoft's AV etc, is because they KNOW windows. Google "mistake user32.dll flagged as virus bluescreen".


    SO true... and I uninstalled Kaspersky and went with Microsoft Security Essentials. I have not noticed any performance issues like I did with Norton, Symantec and Kaspersky. I agree...would love to see how BitDefender out of the box did against the same attacks? Did they do a broader test and see how it stacked up against the market leaders? Of course not... they wouldn't want to show a FREE app performed on par or better than the TOP paid apps.
  • 1 Hide
    noblerabbit , November 12, 2012 5:08 PM
    I had a particular nasty virus about two years ago, and it went undetected with every single antivirus, it basically opened up my bandwidth , like leaving the faucets on full blast in your bathtub, and no one except the people 5 floors down would know about it until they start getting welts in their ceiling.

    The only thing that helped me resolve, was to actually use a Networking Monitor, and know that my useage was being leeched. All this came from a certain cracked audio program I once wanted.

    I was once into collecting programs I'd never need, but today, I truly believe if you really want to make use of a program, then just buy it and support the creator.
  • 0 Hide
    memadmax , November 12, 2012 5:09 PM
    Just my own two cents here.
    I have MSE/MSD on all my computers, except my main.

    Common sense and avoiding shady *cough* erotic *cough* websites on my main have kept it trouble free. Also, I use frontline defense that is more effective in the form of FireFox with noscript and adblocker, while trashing IE.

    The best defense is a good offense IMO.
  • 2 Hide
    nebun , November 12, 2012 5:40 PM
    now how many did Bitdefender sto?....and if the machine got infected how well did it perform when it came time to cleaning up the machine?
Display more comments