Microsoft Security Essentials v2.0

RTmarc

MSE has been bumped to version 2.0.

Microsoft's Security Essentials has officially reached version 2. Ever since its launch last year, MSE has been a favorite among free security software connoisseurs. It's consistently ranked alongside the best paid anti-virus options out there in terms of detection and removal. And it basically blows its free competitors out of the water. The latest version adds an improved heuristic detection engine for weeding out threats that haven't been positively identified yet. It also integrates with Windows Firewall and Windows Filtering Platform (the latter is Vista and Windows 7-only) for protection both from the Web and on local networks. If you've already installed Security Essentials you should find a notice to upgrade under the app's update tab. If you haven't downloaded MSE yet, well then, what are you waiting for? Head over here and grab the latest version to protect your computer for free.

wd40

And it basically blows its free competitors out of the water.

I have been using Avast for some years, I wounder if it really blows avast out of water .. :

it_consultant

Its saved my butt a couple of times. I would put the on access scanner MSE has on par with any of the big names, probably higher when ranked against Symantec and McAfee. The nice thing is that it is simply malware protection, not one of these ultra security tools with HIPS, application control, firewall and a bunch of other BS that just screws the computer up.

Mike-Mike

i like it

Forsaken_GA

I'm not a big fan of Microsoft. Quite the contrary, I advocate not using their services if you have any other options.

And even *I* like Security Essentials. I was skeptical about it at first, then I found out Microsoft bought the company that originally wrote it, and that explained alot for me

tpatt100

I like the software. I forgot what company it was that produced the program I thought Microsoft bought them out some time ago"

SephStorm

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

I'm not a big fan of Microsoft. Quite the contrary, I advocate not using their services if you have any other options.

And even *I* like Security Essentials. I was skeptical about it at first, then I found out Microsoft bought the company that originally wrote it, and that explained alot for me

^ This. Never been a fan of microsoft's products, but MSE has stopped several attack vectors cold. It also scores well on AV Comparatives tests.

thehourman

How's the speed of full system scan?
I have the first version installed on my netbook, and the full system scan took three hours to finish.

Also, what do you guys use for firewall, the built-in Windows firewall or some third party brand?

rwmidl

thehourman wrote: »

How's the speed of full system scan?
I have the first version installed on my netbook, and the full system scan took three hours to finish.

Also, what do you guys use for firewall, the built-in Windows firewall or some third party brand?

I'll have to check the scan time out tonight. I have my scans scheduled to run late at night so it's not something I actively monitor.

For firewall, I just use the built-in Windows firewall (I'm also using NAT and SPI with my router).

Mike-Mike

PC World gave it good reviews

hypnotoad

I find windows firewall to be pretty sufficient, especially the 'advanced' one. It's a lot better than introducing some third-party app to mess things up and give you a false sense of security with sexy anti-hacker cyber-security type graphics.

it_consultant

Like most software companies, MS buys a lot of technologies. Google did that with Keyhole a while ago. MS bought whoever developed their SQL product a long time ago too.

SteveLord

MSE is the best and least annoying.

Ahriakin

it_consultant wrote: »

Its saved my butt a couple of times. I would put the on access scanner MSE has on par with any of the big names, probably higher when ranked against Symantec and McAfee. The nice thing is that it is simply malware protection, not one of these ultra security tools with HIPS, application control, firewall and a bunch of other BS that just screws the computer up.

If by BS you mean protection against advanced blended threats and Zero-day....In this day and age you don't realistically have Malware protection without these. Security essentials is decent, I use it on my HTPC since it does very little internet (just Netflix) and no email or other functions. Everything else uses more advanced packages (that do not screw up the systems in any way).

it_consultant

Ahriakin wrote: »

If by BS you mean protection against advanced blended threats and Zero-day....In this day and age you don't realistically have Malware protection without these. Security essentials is decent, I use it on my HTPC since it does very little internet (just Netflix) and no email or other functions. Everything else uses more advanced packages (that do not screw up the systems in any way).

You should check out the SEP related forums for examples of complaints with these "super" tools. Far from stopping actual threats, they break more than they help. MSE with the windows firewall turned on is on par with what you get from SEP or McAfee.

Layer 7 firewalls and HIPS are relevant for internet facing applications that don't already have an appliance in front of them providing that type of protection. For desktops, those things cause more issues then they are worth.

Bl8ckr0uter

it_consultant wrote: »

Layer 7 firewalls and HIPS are relevant for internet facing applications that don't already have an appliance in front of them providing that type of protection. For desktops, those things cause more issues then they are worth.

I kind of disagree here. Maybe for "desktops" (in the traditional sense) but
any type of endpoint device that will leave your enterprise (laptop, smart phone, etc) protection is a must, right up to layer 7.

it_consultant

I can't see a time when a desktop or laptop will need true layer 7 protection on the host itself. It is already quite difficult to burrow through a firewall, add to that the difficulty of finding this node on the internet for hacking. Laptops should have an encrypted hard drive because most of the time they get "hacked" when someone busts the car window and pulls your computer out of the passenger seat. No amount of firewall will help that scenario.

Just to be clear, a server with a static public IP should have this level of protection since they are designed to be accessible to the internet.

A laptop with a "deny any any" statement on its firewall (which is default) will automatically deny any traffic not originated by the computer itself. Having extra HIPS security is unnecessary and the pain in the ass factor manifests itself when you are in the domain and network drives become unaccessible, traffic to printers stops, pings are blocked, etc. Those are problems I regularly have to deal with at my SEP clients. One hundred percent of the time the problem is solved at the SEP level.

Ahriakin

No offense but you have MAJOR blinkers on here. It's not about someone actively trying to break down your network protection (you keep mentioning the Firewall here). It's about embedded malware in pages, applications etc. that you unknowingly access. Having Layer 5+ protection is primarily aimed at what has already come through your FW through invited connections. You're describing threats as they stood about 5 years ago. Modern malware, and the systems both technical and social, to get it onto your system have evolved a lot. Your protection needs to aswell.

Of course you mention SEP and McAffee, neither of which will be found on a security guy's machines (if they can help it). Their bloated and weak approach does not dictate a lack of need for real in depth protection, nor it's effectiveness when supplied by 'better' vendors.

You've jumped here from discussing a free product aimed at the home user to corporate protection...Of course a corporations needs are totally different, you also have more resources (well, in theory ) to provide 5+ controls before they hit (or spread from) the end hosts. Apples and Oranges, before you even get into public facing server considerations.

it_consultant

If you are a corporate customer then you use the forefront endpoint protection, which is MSE centrally managed and what I have running on this laptop I am typing on. When I talk about bloated crap I am specifically talking about McAfee and SEP since they are some of the most common anti-malware systems out there. In that case, I probably was not talking about whatever you were thinking in the original post you took issue with.

wd40

thehourman wrote: »

How's the speed of full system scan?
I have the first version installed on my netbook, and the full system scan took three hours to finish.

Also, what do you guys use for firewall, the built-in Windows firewall or some third party brand?

I use the free comodo firewall.

it is annoying at times, but it works.

Ahriakin

it_consultant wrote: »

In that case, I probably was not talking about whatever you were thinking in the original post you took issue with.

No issue taken, sorry if it came across that way . Just a good debate.

SephStorm

I've been looking into hips for my home computer, but to tell you the truth, in my experience, having a PC that is up to date, with anti-virus, MSE, threatfire and ff with ABP and no script is all thats needed(maybe some common sense). Even my threatfire has been unnecessary with mse. It catches stuff so quickly that none of the others ever activates. That being said, it had lower scores in some categories on the AV Comparatives test, but they havent released all of the test data yet. does anyone know anyone over there?

As far as scan time, the first scan will take a long time, but follow up scans are traditionally fairly quick.