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."
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?
All right! Obligatory, apropos-of-nothing Ubuntu post appeared sooner than normal! Posted as AC so as to not incur the wrath of the Linux Youth.
I'd expect McAfee and Norton to be much bigger "bulls eye" targets, since they're heavily deployed in corporate environments. MSE isn't.
Just installed it, having the same concern, and am happy to report that the program doesn't look obviously bloated (just some new options for the firewall), and it's consuming about the same amount of RAM as before. On my machine it usually consumed 4600K, and not it's at about 4800K. Not bad at all, really.
Who knows?
Very few people here actually run linux, they just say so to fit in.
There's two processes: The Front end GUI and the backend service (MsMpEng.exe) which usually consumes about 40MB, which is about average for AV products.
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.
You're running Windows, so you're already a big target. Do you really want to try to find something that will go below the radar, or do you want to use what works? MSE is quite good at what it does.
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
You might be a troll, but if not, you are certainly over reacting.
I run windows live messenger and pay attention to the install options which allow me to choose *not* to install things like the Bing Search bar.
Really, you should check your install options with any *free* package, any person who just presses next, next, next without reading what they are doing is simply a fool.
Yes, one could argue that it's evil to have such things ticked by default, but in Microsoft's defense, if you are upgrading messenger, it remembers your previously selected install options and will not by default ask you again to install Bing toolbars and stuff.
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.
There's two processes: The Front end GUI and the backend service (MsMpEng.exe) which usually consumes about 40MB, which is about average for AV products.
I know it doesn't matter when my desktop has 8GB and my nettop has 1GB of RAM, but I'm old enough statements like that make me cringe.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Sure you can, just get it from Ninite and off you go. Of course if you are running a pirated version of Windows it won't work even without WGA, since it will call home on first run, which is when I guess it'll go ahead and check your key. You ARE running a legal copy and not just being a filthy pirate, yes MR AC? Anyway I've checked and no WGA on my XP machine, so if it is a principle thing no worries.
As for TFA, allow me to throw a couple of extra letters and say BS. I just run the update check on BOTH WinXP and Windows 7 X64 and both find new updates to the scanning defs but do NOT update to 2.0. So I'll wait until tomorrow and if it still doesn't update I guess I'll have to do the old fashioned uninstall and reinstall bit.
Personally I like it for myself, as I know I'm just going to places like /. and checking my email. Whereas with my waaaay too click happy customers who may or may not be searching for the pron I prefer Comodo Internet Security, which while being a little more talkative during the learning phase has an excellent sandbox with file and registry virtualization. If you have those kinds of people that can pick up more viruses than a Bangkok Whore I heartily recommend Comodo. It actually uses less RAM than MSE, especially during scanning, which you would think since MSE does less than Comodo would be the opposite. Oh well, I have gobs of RAM and like the fact that MSE never asks me shit, especially when I'm typing, which is when Comodo seems to think is a good time for a nice chat.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
"Posted as AC so as to not incur the wrath of the Linux Youth."
Not posted AC.
Piss on the Linux Youth. They do for Linux adoption what pedo priests do for Catholic recruiting.
I can't wait until they become the BSD Youth and someone else has the benefit of their enlightened advocacy. :P
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
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...
Which is a shame if you're trying to keep an old system going for someone for simple web browsing. The AV can place the biggest RAM burden on a system with only 256MB RAM (more than the OS or browser). Of course slashdot's favorite answer is "Install Linux". But most full desktop distros like Ubuntu are too bloated for such old hardware as well.
While this is true, it's true of plenty of other software, and they make it pretty clear what's going on and what they send. Hell, they named it SpyNet!
For those not able to check right now, it sends: Where the malware came from, what you chose to do or what MSE did for you, (ignore/quarantine/delete), and whether it worked. Yes, sending that info might get personal data as collateral damage (they'll know you downloaded preteenbj.exe, and probably the file path), but that is by no means a new level of information sharing for automated info dumps.
HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
Cool. Sell the 256MB of expensive DDR1 ram you have, and use it to buy a new netbook.
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?
Sorry, but any software calling home without me first of all asking for permission and second of all telling me honestly what it transmits is malware. Period.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
There's always remixes of major distro's designed for older hardware. I believe linux mint (pretty much exactly ubuntu made more user friendly), has a fluxbox based remix, system requirements being 256 MB of ram and 4 gigs of HD space. The main distrobutions all have offshoots designed to run the majority of the software on much less demanding hardware.
I would say it is partly due to their bad OS design (administrator by default), partly due to third party software (doesn't work if user doesn't have administrative rights, often not for valid reasons) and partly due to their success (a massive amount of relatively clueless users, who click on any [OK]/[Yes] button that is presented to them).
If some of these clueless users were to move to Debian and Ubuntu, the same problem might happen there. (Popup to fill in sudo password, user gives admin rights to 'that funny animation' they just got from their uncle they hadn't spoken to in years)
So while Microsoft sure has large part in the problem (user-friendliness over security), much of the problem is also to blame on third party developers and the clueless masses that use Windows.
Fortunately, they do something about it now, although I assume that for every user that is now better protected for free, there will be another anti-virus company that will be complaining about unfair competition.
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.
Pity I have no modpoints.
I am no MS fanboy, but I agree with what you say. I liek that Live DOES remember you deselecting it last time, and doesnt nag you on further updates. Microsoft is obviously going to peddle Bing, but they do make it quite clear, and do it in "the right way".
On the other hand.... take recent versions of Java, and its Yahoo bar... grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Have a nice day!