Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Security Essentials 2.0 Released
Greg writes with this excerpt from Ars Techica: "Following a four-month beta program, Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) 2.0 has been released. The new version significantly revamps the heuristic scanning engine, adds Windows Firewall integration as well as network traffic inspection. The update unquestionably makes MSE, which has already become very popular due to its quiet but effective ways, even more of a must-have for Windows users. MSE has always been very good at finding and removing malware, but it has relied mainly on antimalware definitions. The improved heuristic engine makes it even better at detecting threats; at the same time, we expect the number of false positives to slightly increase as well. The new Windows Firewall integration is a minor improvement: it lets you tweak Microsoft's firewall from inside MSE."
good!
MSE has been a lifesaver at our non profit. We put on all our clients' computers. It's free, works great and best of all, no nag screens to "Upgrade" to the pro version, etc. Nag screens tend to upset our consumers. So yes, It's great.
CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
We have loads scattered around for rdp clients / light browsing w/ XP and MSE 1 has been great. Is MSE 2 under XP more of a hog/same/faster?
I suppose that either I'm out of luck using Ubuntu
or did anyone manage to make it run under Wine yet?
First I want to say I love the first version of MSE.
Light weight, no nagging, and for most part just stays out of the way.
The new version seems more of the same, except it's been freezing my PC since I upgraded yesterday. I currently have it un-installed to see it's the problem, and so far my PC is rock solid like it has always been.
Any ideas or suggestions? I'm "flying blind" right now.
PS: don't ask me to install Linux (it seems more trouble than it's worth half the time, no offence) or get a mac (I'm broke)
seriously?
...will it run on Linux?
Leonardo DiCaprio, think about that for a second.
Did you feel the magic in his eyes, straddling over the table, saying "I've come back for you, to remind you, something....something you once knew..."
Now, do you feel this inceptive magic in MSE 2.0?
No you don't.
MSE is a perception, designed to lure you into a imaginary forte.
You know it is true.
Now, what you need is two strong eyes. A real insurance that you will be safe.
This is exactly what Leonardo can give you.
MSE ran on R2 instead of that shitfest known as Forefuck!!!! I mean ForeFront....
Visit my Forums?
My biggest concern about MSE is that it's released by Microsoft. That makes it a natural target for malware and virus authors -- there's a certain credibility to be earned by writing software that defeats security protection by The Man. I'd prefer to run a less common (but equally effective) anti-virus suite that won't attract as much attention from the black hats. As it is, running MSE 2.0 feels a bit like pinning a big bulls eye target sign on my back.
let's hope they dont screw this little gem up.
Even better to be without malware for 10 years now! Thanks Debian and Ubuntu!
`echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
There's a serious problem on MSE. What happens is that the MS's Messenger installer and windows updates will sneakily replace your firefox's default search engine with bing instead of Google. Without user consent. Which is where most of bing's page views come from in the first place. If you google this issue you'll find tons of people complaining bing took over their firefox out of nowhere.
So by definition, MSFT's Messenger adn system updates are malwares. But Microsoft Essentials won't detect Microsoft's own malware. Just a little bit biased one would say. Can we trust the anti-virus of a virus making company?
Linux desperately needs something like this, or it will never be able to compete on the Desktop.
The problem goes even deeper; there is a serious lack of malware written for Linux. It just isn't profitable enough for malware-developers to target the platform. And mainstream adoption will sadly remain a dream until that changes.
Kudos to MS for showing how it's done.
We are currently assessing endpoint security products for around 6,000 desktops. The subject of Forefront actually came up, partly because of it's low cost. Yet, I can't find any evaluation of the product in professional reviews, likely due to how new it is. I'd really like to see how it stacks up for the sake of due diligence.
How's that any different from any other major AV programs? Some viruses shut down AV software. They know how to get most of the major ones, and perhaps all of them (AV software tells Windows it is AV software, they could use the same sort of thing). So unless you want to change all the time to lesser known AV softwares, from companies that you don't know about (and remember that fake AV software is big) then this isn't an issue.
What's more, the power in AV software on a system isn't virus elimination, it is virus prevention. The whole reason to run an AV program all the time, rather than something like a scheduled task, is it scans files as they come in to your computer, as they execute, and so on. So, if a virus tries to sneak in, the AV software can block it. The virus has to chance to do anything to the AV software as it is not running. It is a "position of primacy" sort of thing. Whoever is there first has the advantage as it can stop the other guy at the door. This is also why when a system gets infect, it is sometimes necessary to do an offline scan, boot from a CD or take the HD to a new computer, because the virus can prevent AV software from being loaded since it is already running.
Virus authors try to defeat any and all virus scanners. It is their business to get on systems. MSE has no special place in that. What matters is how well your virus software is able to pick up on them as they come in (and also how fast it runs as to not slow your system down). MSE isn't the best out there, but it is quite good.
So is there anything stopping its adoption in the enterprise and Fortune 500 companies, replacing the likes of Norton? How about managed updates, LAN update server, policy based scanning settings etc?
When you have upgraded Microsoft Security Essentials - be certain to open the program and click the Setting tab.
Next, on the left of the Settings tab page, click on Microsoft SpyNet. You might find it interesting that you have been opted-in.
Now Clippy jumps up, unfolds, and pokes you in the butt and says "It looks like you've been infected. Would you like me to brick your CPU?"
If these are security "essentials", why the fuck aren't they part of the product to begin with?
i have on my uni provided laptop forefront client security. it seems to be identical to MSE. the only problem is that these idiots have made it impossible to change the auto scan schedule. does anybody know of a good reason not to uninstall forefront and install MSE?
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
There's one thing I'd like to see in MSE: Control over when it looks for updates. I'd prefer being able to schedule what time of the day it does this, or even have the ability to turn it off and do all updates manually like with all other updates for Windows and Microsoft products.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
MSE install fails genuine check on Windows 7 Ultimate and won't even install. Windows is legit and activated and MS website activation passes and says its genuine. Oh well, the good ole trusty M$ quality again...
I personally run avast on my windows computers.
Security Essentials has made it easier for me to convince a lot of people to stop paying for Norton AV because the MS brand eases their mind (the bitter irony).
It's not that i have a qualm with paying for software, it's just that i don't think Norton does a better job than any of the free AV options.
Unfortunately, it still has the restriction that you cannot install it on Windows Server 2008 (the OS I'm using on my development laptop).
No new version is being pulled down on an update, and the "upgrade" option only appears on the help menu, which claims version 1.0.2498.0 is the latest version. What gives?
We deal with computers that have been infected with Viruses all day long. Most of these have Norton, McAfee, Avira or AVG. We almost always remove and put MSE in its place. Our return rate of infected computers is VERY low. Thumbs up for MSE from us.
I have switched to MSE and so far am happy with it. Got tired of the Avast nags to upgrade. Poor approach on their part.
What happens when >50% of Windows computers are using MSE, will malware be written specifically to bypass it the same way it does for the other major AV players? Is too much success a bad thing?
One options that comes as new to me and a good welcome: in the Settings tab the user has a change to say "I do not want to join Spynet".
I remember once the only option available being: Basic (minimum needed) or Advanced.
Apparently the chaps at M$ have collected enough information, now they let who chooses to do so to get out of it. If confirmed: well done.
And it installs perfectly on a cracked Win 7 Pro x64.
Genuine Advantage, heh...
Fancy that -- It looks as though MSE now supports 64 bit Windows XP.
I was a Nod32 fan since the beta of XP, but switched to MSE when it came out because Nod32 kept getting more bloated by each version, and having to pay for it each year, versus FREE was a good push to try it. I visit "questionable" sites weekly (mostly torrent/hacker) and it's blocked several items. I use a 1-2 punch of MSE, and just to be on the safe side, I check malware using Malware Bytes Anti-Malware.
"Whatever exists here is mine..." -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1916240&cid=34612834
APK
P.S.=> Including ITT Tech Man, Professor hairyfeet, who got owned by not only proof from myself, but also others here on /., with more by request no less (but, I think what's there does the job - my std. "Kung Fu" has been HUGELY administered, & it was, as-per-my-usual? Just too, Too, TOO EASY... 2 EZ! RofFlMaO... apk
"Whatever exists here is mine..." -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1916240&cid=34612834
APK
P.S.=> Including ITT Tech Man, Professor hairyfeet, who got owned by not only proof from myself, but also others here on /., with more by request no less (but, I think what's there does the job - my std. "Kung Fu" has been HUGELY administered, & it was, as-per-my-usual? Just too, Too, TOO EASY... 2 EZ! RofFlMaO... apk
Would you run both at once? Right now MSE seems to think AdAware is malware LOL.
"Following a four-month beta program, Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) 2.0 has been released. The new version significantly revamps the heuristic scanning engine, adds Windows Firewall integration as well as network traffic inspection .."
..
Yet more sticking plaster for a system that is unfixable
http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/msestart/thread/22930cda-a0bd-4263-890b-ddf812859ca4
3rd hit on Google. You must be a project manager.
I've got W7 Ultimate - MSE has worked for me since I installed it. And the upgrade also works, never any nags about some issue or other. You might have something else that's stopping the trouble-free installation of this update.
Why did I post this? Ask me now!
It could be that the "linux youth" read the MS EULA and they weren't quit comfortable with it.
Windows assumes you are an idiot...Linux demands proof.
Some questions:
1. Is it less resource-intensive than 1.0? I know that the general view is that MSE is light on resources but my (admittedly old) single-core AMD 3500+ sometimes pauses for several seconds with MSE maxing out the CPU usage.
2. Does it integrate with 3rd-party firewalls as well? I happen to run Comodo.
3. Is it available from outside the US? I had to get 1.0 from a 3rd party host.
http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/msestart/thread/22930cda-a0bd-4263-890b-ddf812859ca4
3rd hit on Google. You must be a project manager.
You missed the point by a mile, so that probably makes you upper management... 1) This "fix" you reference doesn't work for me. Yes, I can google for stuff. 2) Users shouldn't have to jump thru hoops like this, _ever_. If you think making legit users do things like this is acceptable... well, I'm sorry for you. 3) M$ seems to have at least three different ways to check for activation status (the one at System Properties, one at Web and one at MSE)... WTF?