Is Microsoft crushing the antivirus industry?

Topic

New Reply

Eugene Kaspersky – founder of Kaspersky Lab – thinks so. Microsoft’s long walked a tightrope in the antivirus and threat monitoring arena. With the in
[See the full post at: Is Microsoft crushing the antivirus industry?]

Reply | Quote

Replies

Remember when claims that “Microsoft wants to take control of your computer” were treated with derision?

No, me, either. That was a long time ago.

Reply | Quote

I am not surprised by this, wonder why it didn’t come up sooner.
I also expect complaints about the forced use of Cortana/Bing/Edge search and the inability to use the search engine of choice.
Have not heard the results of the complaint about excessive data collection that one of the European countries raised.

Reply | Quote

The reason why it didn’t become public sooner? The antivirus companies don’t want to annoy Microsoft. They’re highly dependent on MS for their multi-billion-dollar operations.

Reply | Quote

It’s just one more thing in the litany of things Microsoft is doing that aren’t right. Another would be claiming that perfectly legitimate downloads from the Internet “can harm your computer” just because their AV software hasn’t seen a lot of people download it before.

Is it just me or does it seem like Microsoft is slowly trying to make anti-competitiveness the norm?

They can’t be allowed to get away with it. Legal eagles thrive on precedent.

-Noel

Reply | Quote

It’s not just you… M$ has been built upon aggressively ‘marketing’ other companies out of business… and purchasing competitors and then integrating lesser versions of said competitors products into their OS. It’s all business as usual.

Reply | Quote

His central point certainly feels valid to me, as is his observation about independent software developers in general at the end of his piece.
It also not difficult to agree that security is stronger as a wider, more diverse community with many varied contributors.But that is true of almost anything isn’t it?

But I also feel that he and his PR guy lost a little logic, and a little of the force of their argument,when spreading their grievances wider.

A couple of examples:
“…You intentionally – or not (e.g., with bundled software) – install a trial version of a different AV…” – gaining our sympathy for bundled foistware is going to be an interesting one.
“….And if a user forgets to renew a license, then Microsoft deactivates the ….” – come on Mr Kaspersky – manage your own subscribers.
“….the functionality front: it doesn’t have: parental control, built-in VPN, webcam protection…” – they always start out talking about AV and then bring this up. If Defender pretended to be anything other it would be a fair point but it doesn’t.

I feel this kind of thing blunts some of the force of his argument by unnecessarily blurring the subject. Also all of the paid solutions are guilty of rampant, intrusive upselling. If they sold a solid, tight AV product version that left it at that, I would be more likely to look at it. Alot of the bloatware in their “Protection Suites” are fluff and nonsense. The problems they are known to cause are well documented.

I know one thing though – I would be delighted if Microsoft sent their in- development versions to Mr Kaspersky rather than to me as an end user!

Reply | Quote

Kaspersky seems to have a lot of good points in his “I’ve had enough” post.

(Although the overly-dramatic “David & Goliath” flourishes I could have done without.
And I thought the frog-in-boiling water claim that did not originate with they guy he quoted it from was shown to be false about 20 years ago.)

Most of us here have been saying the following about various MS actions for a long time:
“Shooting yourself in the foot.
Actually, Microsoft’s actions aren’t only making things worse for users and killing off the whole ecosystem of independent developers; they’re also undermining users’ trust in Microsoft….”
-Kaspersky

His claims that MS antivirus isn’t actually that good when compared to its competitors match the results that I’ve seen from independent bodies over the years.

Probably a lot of people who have grown up in Russia and have studied at any of their educational institutions have in one way or another studied at a KGB-affiliated or a government-affiliated or a Communist-party-affiliated institution — it would be remarkable if there were much choice in the matter, for most people there who wanted to study beyond high school level.
So I don’t hold the fact that he studied at a KGB-sponsored cryptography institute, decades ago, against him, or think that makes his motives suspect. (Would it be likely that there would even be a NON-KGB-affiliated cryptography institute in Russia?)

However, what stands out to me in the Bloomberg article (that Woody quoted from in his blogpost above) as much more _suspect_ is the following:
“In 2012, however, Kaspersky Lab abruptly changed course.
Since then, high-level managers have left or been fired, their jobs often filled by people with closer ties to Russia’s military or intelligence services.
Some of these people actively aid criminal investigations by the FSB, the KGB’s successor, using data from some of the 400 million customers who rely on Kaspersky Lab’s software, say six current and former employees who declined to discuss the matter publicly because they feared reprisals.”

And that concern is why, when I was looking at all antivirus providers about 3 years ago, I decided against going with Kaspersky anti-virus software for my computer, even though it’s normally one of the top 3 in independent studies.
In a post I made on AskWoody.com last year, I am pretty sure that I mentioned this too-close-to-the-Russian-state-and-spying-organizations concern about Kaspersky, when I was describing why I continue to use Norton Security.

Those specific side issues regarding Kaspersky Labs’ associations and data usage are an entirely different matter though — whatever _that_ situation is,
it does not make it “okay” for Microsoft to be such an obfuscating, greedy bully when it comes to the way it is treating ALL third-party anti-virus programs in relation to Windows 10.
It’s not a Russia v. US political matter, it is about an extremely powerful company that is acting in monopolistic ways and over-stepping its bounds.

Reply | Quote

On the point Kaspersky makes about the actual performance of Defender.

The balance of opinion that I have gathered from people who have proper technical knowledge(most certainly not me) is that the latest version of Defender is ok – not perfect, but what is – and will give adequate protection when combined with other sensible things. eg malwarebytes/browser anti-exploit/a secondary program for occassional scans/general good practice with browsing and emails etc.

The consensus seems to be that paid versions, of course, have to justify their price tag and none of it has much to do with helping keep you secure.Whatever that actually means. Less vulnerable than doing nothing?

What do you think?

Reply | Quote

@UKBrianC,

In my experience of Norton Security, they do not practice “rampant, intrusive upselling”.

In fact, I hardly even think about it and I am not reminded of it at all
(until there are 30 days left in the subscription, then I think a few renewal reminders flash up in the last month.)

Maybe that’s because I use a paid version ($19.95 a year for 5 devices).
(I don’t think they have a free version that would try to up-sell to people.)

I don’t even get a monthly report of what the software has fended off and processed flashing up on my screen anymore (I did see that in prior years; maybe I have turned it off somehow).

Reply | Quote

Bucking the “consensus”, AskWoody contributor LizzyTish and I both have been happy with Norton Security and we have praised it in past threads on this site.

I won’t repeat what I’ve already written about them on AskWoody.com, beyond saying that:
– I do feel that the price tag that I pay is worth it (I always spend less than $20 a year for 5 devices, and in some years I get it free or for just $5)
– The support they’ve given me (including an hour-long very helpful phone call with a US native working from a call center on the West Coast) has been fine
– Their product provides me with real and substantial protection, and it has saved me a few times when all my other defensive actions have not kept a “baddie” from nearly getting in
– I value the amount of time using Norton Security saves me, in lieu of faffing around and cobbling together other disparate products. I’m not a computer hobbyist, I don’t enjoy experimenting with things and continuously dabbling, updating, and checking them for the sake of it, I just want to protect my computer efficiently and with no fuss.

Reply | Quote

I think it didn’t come up sooner because:
– Windows 7 comes out of the box with Windows Defender which is not a competitive product and has limited scope
– MSE is a separate download like AVG, Avast, Avira
– Windows 10 and windows Server 2016 are the first products which come with a full antimalware competitive product built-in the OS

Reply | Quote

I was a customer of Kaspersky products about a decade ago and was very satisfied with its performance and the apparent diversity of its management team. But several years ago a Croatian friend of mine informed me about the problematic interrelationships of Mr. Kaspersky with high-ranking Russian government officials.

My own investigations at that time supported that, including photographic evidence of Kaspersky and Putin socializing together. If one reads much about the extent to which Russian government and organized crime figures are intertwined, it’s enough to give one pause.

Furthermore, it’s become increasingly obvious that highly successful Russian business owners who are not friendly, directly or indirectly, with Putin’s government have shortened lifespans. The implication being that anyone allowed to continue to be successful in Russia is more than just casual spa-buddies with government officials.

As a result, I uninstalled all of my Kaspersky products several years ago. I do think that they make excellent products. But I was also quite convinced, following my research, that their products most likely included features/backdoors that would allow them to cull information from customers’ PCs. And I was very concerned when I learned that the US government was considering using Kaspersky Labs products on their PCs. I’m quite relieved to read in one of these linked articles that this idea has been scrapped.

While I agree with Kaspersky’s overall complaint regarding M$’s monopolistic activities. I hope that no one, for even one moment, considers Kaspersky himself to be arguing from an independent, objective, and altruistic position.

Reply | Quote

Have you ever looked at Kaspersky’s Terms of Service and Privacy Policy? Have you looked at their website and the amount of tracking software on it? Not to mention the shady redirecting links which wants you to register. (tip: follow the ‘update’ links instead of the ‘download’ ones)

What about Avira’s “secure search” which is a disguised Ask toolbar?
Some 3rd party link: https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/avc_datasending_2014_en.pdf

Many of the popular AV companies should be considered spyware/riskware imo. Windows 10 Home version is nothing compared to them. They promise privacy while looking your chat in the cloud for “parental control”. They promise safety while hijacking browser https traffic. They promise security while allowing you to remote control your firewall with 1 click from their ad-bloated website.

You can criticize Microsoft with many things, but their security department is on the top these days. I even want to congratulate them for forcing automatic updates on users. That is probably the biggest security improvement in the last decade. Getting rid of some “un-secure security companies” would be another huge leap.

Reply | Quote

Even if the specific “frog in boiling water” analogy leaves something to be desired, Mr. Kaspersky is to be commended on his recognition of Microsoft’s attempts to change what’s considered “normal” and “okay”.

-Noel

Reply | Quote

Thats interesting to hear. I freely admit that I have not looked at Norton specifically for some time. Feedback from actual users is so much more helpful.

Reply | Quote

Apologies poohsticks – my “consensus” usage was ambiguous. I was meaning only the consensus of the small group of opinions of people that I have come to trust on this issue. I wasn’t in any way trying to be spokesperson for a general consensus. Not a clue! That is why I am interested to hear the views of the much wider, knowledgable community on here.

I also prefer when my tech just works and have a limited patience, and skills, with “fiddling about” in the mechanics.

Reply | Quote

I was so underwhelmed by the shoddy quality of recent updates to Norton that I uninstalled it!

Reply | Quote

+1

Reply | Quote

I use Norton Security – 5 licenses but I think it was more like $70 per year.

Mostly has worked fine for last 3 years, though a couple temporary crashes and one REALLY annoying stretch during MS Win 10 marketing where Norton would wake my PC from sleep every hour or so.

If you can get it for $20 for 5 license noted above then great deal. At $70 per year, ok if you need 5 licenses. But would prefer they offered it in 1 and 2 licenses.

Reply | Quote

How do you get it for $20? Last time I went to renew, they wanted more like $70. I only need one or two licenses.

Reply | Quote

@UKBrianC,

Oh, I didn’t take any offence at your usage of “consensus”!

In fact, I think it _is_ true that many of the cognoscenti don’t particularly encourage the use of paid antivirus programs, in contrast to using a patchwork of free ones and perhaps employing some complicated manoeuvers like EMET and sandboxing and whatnot.

If you are interested in what various participants here have said about that topic, there have been small discussions on this issue previously on AskWoody.com — the search function here is not great, but you can use an external search engine to search the site for the relevant keywords.

Reply | Quote

The way they forced upgrading to Windows 10 on people who were caught unawares,

the way they changed the meaning of the “X” the the upper-right corner of a window from “make this window go away, without my giving you a decision on it one way or the other” to “yes, I will accept everything you want me to, even when I don’t know what you have in store for me”,

the way they are sneakily, forcefully increasing the telemetry in all of their operating systems and other entities,

the way they are violating the “spirit”, if not also the wording, of some of their prior agreements with customers,

the way that they are purchasing companies like Linked In so they can collect, triangulate and monetize a vast amount of data on people and organizations across the world,

the way that they consistently try to overstep governmental regulations and engage in anti-competitive, monopolistic actions,

the way that they have bought and run a number of decent external companies into the ground…

well, I do NOT “want to congratulate them for forcing automatic updates on users”.

The fact that there are some other companies out there which do dodgy things
is no especial reason to let Microsoft, which also does dodgy things, get away with doing them, especially to the point where they hold a near-monopoly position.

Reply | Quote

+1
Microsoft are only doing what other security software manufacturers have been doing for years.
Now that it’s highlighted, paranoia and mistrust seem top of the agenda for users.
Microsoft’s security has vastly improved over the last couple of years and we applaud their stance on the update policy also.(albeit not the data telemetry)
Protecting THEIR OS on your PC is re-assuring and a step forward IMHO

Windows - commercial by definition and now function...

Reply | Quote

I’ve been using paid versions of Trend Micro’s Internet Security products for many years and I’ve never seen any “upsell” with their products either.

As poohsticks stated about Norton, Trend Micro also starts popping up warnings 30 days in advance of expiration but that’s not what I’d consider an “annoyance”… to me that’s a benefit! I’ve had a few nightmare worthy experiences over the years repairing/recovering computers with Norton installed because it literally takes control of the entire system including far too many parts of the OS, so I personally wouldn’t touch Norton with a 20 foot pole myself.

Just an FYI about the 2017 version of Trend Micro Maximum Security… it offers a layer of protection from ransomware which has become quite prevalent lately. They also offer a FREE recovery tool if you’ve been attacked by ransomware and a FREE virus scanning program if you’ve already been virus infected. I don’t know of any other Internet Security product that offers these recovery services for free!

Reply | Quote

Before you even think of spending a fortune on anti-trust actions, just remember who takes over the ropes on January 20th in the US. Republicans are also just waiting to get their paws on the internet and broadband.

Reply | Quote

Good point – but I’ll seal off that part of the conversation here.

When the Lounge is up I’ll have a place set up for discussion of political events and the industry. Until then, no politics, please.

Reply | Quote

Woody,

Thanks for stopping the ‘Polistinks’ (MY spelling).

On the antivirus discussion, I have been using Vipre Internet Security for about 4 years with GREAT success. 2 years ago they were running a special that I jumped on. I got a “PC Lifetime” for $49 subscription for both of my computers. I have had disasters with Norton, Malware Bytes, AVG, and Avast. All let in virus that caused my machine (at the time) to go feet up. EMET was not effective for me either. Defender SEEMED to be OK, but at the time I used it, it would only update about every 2 to weeks. Vipre has stopped nearly everything in it’s tracks. If it doesn’t completely block it, I get a notice that “SOMETHING” is trying to get in. All I have to do is unplug the internet connection and the problem stops right there.

Unfortunately, they are not offering that package at this time. I guess I just got lucky.

Sorry about the rant, just my 2 cents worth.

Dave

Reply | Quote

+1

Reply | Quote

poohsticks, the actions you criticize is not the work of their security department. Except the automatic updates. And I am pretty sure you wouldn’t criticize that either if they left out the telemetry parts. With that said, Windows 10 with it’s new kernel and driver handling is a huge security update. Too bad that Cortana and the new UI ruins it.

Reply | Quote

My most humble apology. I forgot the rules.

Reply | Quote

You have some very reasonable concerns. I’m particularly concerned about the future of net neutrality. But, alas, the Jan 20 inauguration will change the playing field. Who knows what awaits?

Reply | Quote

I don’t agree with Mr Kaspersky.

While I do agree that there is plenty to dislike about Microsoft’s current strategies, I fail to see the intent or motive on MS’s part to compete with the AV vendors.

But I do see a possible clumsy, incompetent effort to provide users who would not otherwise bother to install an AV program, with a better than nothing approach.

The false argument here is that Microsoft is somehow profiting from Defender at the expense of the little guy.

Just where is this profit supposed to come from?

No doubt that the clumsy MS effort may hurt the third party developers some. But I think most savvy users would prefer a better add-on security product.

I did in fact encounter this weird behavior on one upgrade from Win 8.1 to Win 10. I had Avira Pro running before the upgrade, but it was disabled after the upgrade. I had to uninstall and re-install Avira to get Defender to back down and behave…SMH.

Reply | Quote

+1

Reply | Quote

I am not poohsticks and don’t presume to answer for her. But responding to your point on my own, there is more with which to be dissatisfied with automatic updates than the telemetry, breaking things that previously weren’t broken is just one example.

For myself, the larger issue is that I neither need nor want the original manufacturer of any of my personal belongings to remove me from the decision-making process of how, when, or if my personal belongings should be “improved.” None of the other objects or products that I own behave in such a paternalistic fashion.

Reply | Quote

@Randall,

In 2 past posts on different threads on AskWoody.com, I have described how I find such great prices on Norton every year (and I have done so for probably 8 to 10 years now).
The search function here isn’t very good though (nothing to do with Woody, it’s down to the blogging platform), so I’ll give a few pointers here –

It’s not hard to do, but it does take a little watching out for it each year; maybe takes an extra 30 to 60 minutes of my time total per year to keep an eye on the retailers’ prices and to see which Norton rebates are being offered.

Norton actually has a webpage that lists all their rebates and whether they are for a particular store (like Sam’s Club, Staples, or wherever), or whether they are for any retailer purchase — at least they did have such a webpage.

The year that they changed over from the product Norton Internet Security to the product Norton Security (cloud-based), they had fewer deals than before — with N.I.S. I never paid more than $9.99 a year for it, and often paid $0 due to rebates and retailer sale prices. With Norton Security, I’d say that I’ve never paid more than $19.99 for it, and that’s without faffing around with any rebates (which I still think are sometimes offered) — I just jump on a deal when a retailer lists it below $20 — I order the box version that they mail to you — and I save it until the last day of my current subscription and then load up the new subscription (by simply entering the new subscription number that is on a postcard inside the mailed box into my Norton account online).

About a month ago, I happened to see that Fry’s electronics store (which I don’t have near me, but you can order online for home delivery) was offering the Norton Security subscription for $19.99 for 5 devices (it was “on sale” there for $39.99 and then Fry’s had a coupon code that offered another instant $20 off), and I decided that $19.99 was low enough that I would go ahead and get that one for my 2017 Norton coverage. (That week they actually had a better coupon code that would have taken the price of the Norton Security down to $14.99, but you only had access to that if you received their email customer newsletter, which I do not.)

Once or twice I have bought it from Amazon for less than $20 — the price tends to vary a lot there, but something that low on Amazon doesn’t come around too often. Make sure to buy the one in the mailed-out box, not the instant download, because the instant download will delete the days that you still have left in your current subscription…

If you have a current Norton account and you do not buy your next year’s subscription from Norton itself, but rather buy it from a retailer (anyone like Amazon, Frys, Office Depot, Staples, Best Buy, etc. etc.), Norton will not “give” you the number of days that you have left in your present subscription when you load up a new year’s subscription, they will start your new 365-day subscription and delete the days you have left in your old subscription. Therefore, I always wait until the day that my current one will be ending, before punching in the new subscription code that came in the mailed box.

However, if you have a current Norton account and you buy your next year’s subscription from Norton themselves, they will extend your new subscription and tack on all the days that you still have outstanding in your present subscription. Since there is no technical necessity for them to differentiate like that, I feel that it’s a sort of unnecessary “punishment” to the people who buy their next year’s sub from a non-Norton company for a much cheaper price, but I guess it’s their rodeo and they can do what they like… it’s just that they don’t make it clear to customers upfront; they only find out later that their remaining days have disappeared, and that is not a good way to treat people.

I think the old Norton Internet Security product was for 3 computers, but I appreciate the current 5-device allowance because Norton Security can also be used on mobile/cell phones. I take care of a relative’s electronics as well as my own and between us we end up using all of the available Norton device slots.

Reply | Quote

The intrusive Microsoft Get-Win-10 campaign was probably responsible for the weird behavior of your Norton at that time.

I’ve never had any crashes caused by Norton on my computers.

I did have one problem about a year ago where a Microsoft Windows Update patch clashed pretty badly with my Norton installation and I had to re-install Norton (which happened to a lot of their customers). I think that each company blamed the other one for the problem.

Reply | Quote

@Randall,

I have answered your question in a new post that appears a few comments above this one in this thread.

Reply | Quote

@Anonyamous,

Regarding your statement “the automatic updates…. I am pretty sure you wouldn’t criticize that either if they left out the telemetry parts.”

No, I DO criticize their Windows Updates automatic updates, because:

1) there is one “important” update from the spring of 2015 that is so incompatible and bad for my computer (causes endless loop and then if you try to stop it, causes a BSOD) that I can never allow it to be installed on my computer.
It has happened to other customers as well.
There is no fix for it.
I have described the circumstances of this Windows Update several times here on AskWoody.com in the past.
Woody wrote an article about it on InfoWorld, so it was something that was important enough to cross his radar.

2) there is an “optional” (although maybe now it is being labelled “recommended” or “important”, I do not know) update which screwed up my Intel Bluetooth adapter.
It has happened to other customers as well.
The situation still seems to be a bit murky and there isn’t a clear indication about whether Intel has completely solved this for even a proportion of their Intel Bluetooth adapter customers, but there is a proportion of their customers whom Intel has outright told they will never have a fix for it.
I have described the circumstances of this Windows Update several times here on AskWoody.com in the past.
Woody wrote an article about it on InfoWorld, so it was something that was important enough to cross his radar.

Situation 1 is why I can not allow Windows Updates to be on automatic ever again, because the minute that the Monthly Rollups become truly cumulative (which I guess will happen in a few months’ time), that would be it for my computer.

Situation 2 may or may not be fixed on my computer; frankly I am loathe to probe it too much, because I am hazy on what an Intel Bluetooth ProSet wireless adapter does and how to troubleshoot it and test it. Let alone screwing up the Bluetooth, I don’t want to mess up my computer’s wireless adapter in the process.

Reply | Quote

@John W,

You wrote, “The false argument here is that Microsoft is somehow profiting from Defender at the expense of the little guy.
Just where is this profit supposed to come from?”

If Microsoft is forcibly uninstalling paid-for (or even free) third-party antivirus programs from a computer,
with little or no warning,

and/or is giving the computer owner threatening-looking and/or confusing information windows encouraging them to make choices that they don’t understand and which will uninstall their personally-chosen third-party antivirus program from their computer,

then what Microsoft is doing is crushing the competition and taking away something that the customer had freely chosen (and sometimes had paid for) to have on the computer.

Microsoft doesn’t have to make a profit of $x on that particular manoeuver at that moment in time, it’s enough that they are banishing the other competitors’ products by stealth, and installing/activating their own product — it reduces the market share of the competitors, it reduces the profit of the competitors.

Many Microsoft customers won’t know what has happened — they are not “savvy users” and they have the impression that once they pay for something and set it up a certain way, it will stay like that.

Calling the MS effort “clumsy” gives the impression that they are second-rate, somewhat-unprofessional participants who don’t quite know what they are doing, but have the right intentions and should be forgiven for overstepping the rules and accepted practices of our society.

Nothing could be further from the truth. As I have said many times here, they are generally intelligent and educated people, they have access to the best strategists, they have canny, obsessed business leaders who are guiding their choices and practices; they _know_ what they are doing.

Reply | Quote

Congratulate M$ for coercing users into accepting automatic updates? Hardly.

Reply | Quote

Microsoft has already announced a for-pay anti-malware service for businesses. The consumer is next – along with for-pay Office service, for-pay offline storage service, etc.

Down the road, I believe they are moving toward an online for-pay OS service, in a VM on their servers, with added for-pay costs for whatever apps you want in the VM, and online-only storage for your data (much along the line of a ChromeBook). Your PC, then, becomes a dumb terminal.

It won’t be tomorrow. They have to get OS cloned first (think Win10). Win7 is gone in 2020 and there is not enough Win8.1 to cause them problems after that.

Reply | Quote

I share that view. In many ways it is the only way to explain alot of their current behaviour. It seems wrong/misguided with the current model but much less so with what you describe. They don’t mind steamrolling what we’ve all got used to (and our squawks of protest) because, after not so very many years, it won’t be there anymore.

Reply | Quote

Poohsticks…… when I renew my NS if the current subscription is still running……. meaning ‘x’days left….. by getting in contact with them by ‘Chat’ and explaining the situation they will automatically extend by adding on the days still left on your current subscription. You don’t need to specifically order through them….. you can buy it from anywhere you wish.
Been doing this for years. LT

Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom.
– George S. Patton

~ Auther Unknown

Reply | Quote

@poohsticks……….. +1 LT

Reply | Quote

My +1………… was meant to go under poohsticks comments re:
“The way they forced upgrading to Windows 10 on people who were caught unawares,…..”
Way up above!!! Just so that you know!!! LT

Reply | Quote

This may be slightly off topic Woody, but do you still believe MSE/WD is a good product to use as long as it’s combined with say, Malwarebytes and safe web habits (not clicking on every link, etc.)?

Reply | Quote

@Lizzytish,

Thank you!

Reply | Quote

I’m going to get blasted but, yes, I do.

Reply | Quote

I have to ask the question. Is AV even still necessary? I’m an IT admin with a strong background in Infosec. I work for a company that has a few dozen users. We’re running MSE and I don’t think I’ve seen anything in quarantine for 5 years maybe longer. And it’s not that MSE is doing it’s job because if it stopped anything it would log it, but there’s nothing there. Perhaps there’s a couple of different reasons. Systems are current with security updates, we don’t use IE, we use FF with HTTPS Everywhere and Privacy Badger, no FLASH and users have been instructed to never click attachments if there’s an accompanying warning like (This is a dangerous file Ding Dong, are you REALLY sure you want to open it? ‘cauz you know you’re gonna get your A*s kicked) Ya know, the stuff so many users with infected computers ignore.

Reply | Quote

It’s Microsoft’s SOP… has been since forever…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_and_extinguish

Reply | Quote

Defender is different between Windows 7 and 8. In Windows 8 it was called Defender but was MSE. Windows 7 defender was weaker and you had to install MSE to get full protection (Or fuller anyway)

On another note. Windows 8 has Flash preinstalled. So even MSE couldn’t protect that POC

Reply | Quote

Sorry, I am not familiar at all with Windows 8 and very little with 8.1.
So the Defender in 8/8.1 is the same thing with Defender in Windows 10?
If this is the case, then my post should be ammended as Windows 8/8.1 are the first products (and not Windows 10/2016) which come with the the full antimalware suite built-in.
Then why Mr Kaspersky has taken notice only now?

Reply | Quote

I can’t see beyond Thurrott’s first paragraph due to his paywall,
but I thought that the massive photo of David at the start of his article was a nice touch. 😉

I went back to Kaspersky’s article to see how big his David was — his article features just a small picture of David’s face as it appeared on one of the Kaspersky product boxes.

Reply | Quote

+1 thanks for the link

Reply | Quote

Just a thought…. If a lot of people pick Group C, their choice of AV will become very important.

Reply | Quote

+1

Reply | Quote

You don’t need Malwarebytes, but you need the safe web habits. And Woody is right, now we are 2 to get blasted 🙂

Reply | Quote

@Randall,

Today Amazon Prime members can get 15 months (3 extra months) of Norton Security (5 devices) for $19.99.

People who are not Amazon Prime members can get it for $29.99.

https://www.amazon.com/Security-Deluxe-Exclusive-15-month-Subscription/dp/B01MF5MTWP/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1479678076&sr=8-6&keywords=norton+internet+security

Reply | Quote

An affiliate link: Norton Security Deluxe 5 Device PC/Mac

Reply | Quote

If you don’t mind messing around with a rebate and signing up for a newsletter so you can get a coupon code, Fry’s will be selling

Norton Security (3 devices)
PLUS
Norton Utilities (3 machines)

for FREE

on Friday.

(But you do have to mess around with a rebate and signing up for their email newsletter so you can get a coupon code.)

It is the offer at the very end of the following page, on the left side of the page:

http://images.frys.com/art/email/111916_BlackFridayPrev/blackpre_web.html?site=homepage

Reply | Quote

It was a new twist to me that Kaspersky turns out to be complaining about an expired subscription being the trigger for MS to try to replace the paid AV with MSE/Defender.

All other media reports said that Kaspersky was complaining about Windows uninstalling paid for AV products. This implied that the subscriptions were up to date.

If true, the expired subscription angle would exonerate Microsoft to some extent. Without an up to date subscription, paid AV is worse than useless.

Reply | Quote

As for the deactivation upon upgrade and the dire warnings, these are not news. They’ve been around in some form or another since the early dev versions of Windows 8.0. I’ve “nexted” them ever since, reinstalling of switching brands for third-party AV programs every time there’s a major update or upgrade.

Of course, since I use only free AV products, I lose no money by making the decision and reinstalling each time. No expired subscriptions to worry about either.

FWIW, my latest combo for Win 10 Pro is Avira Free plus Malwarebytes Free, with MS Safety Scanner downloaded and run each month alongside MSRT. (I dropped AVG when Avast started to take them over.)

Reply | Quote

+1

Reply | Quote