Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Fails Antivirus Certification Test (Again), Challenges the Results
redletterdave writes "For the second time in a row, Microsoft's Security Essentials failed to earn certification from AV-Test, the independent German testing lab best known for evaluating the effectiveness of antivirus software. Out of 25 different security programs tested by AV-Test, including software from McAfee, Norman, Kaspersky, and others, Microsoft's Security Essentials was just one out of three that failed to gain certification. These results are noteworthy because Microsoft Security Essentials is currently (as of December) the most popular security suite in North America and the world."
Yes, you did imply that. This is harder to explain in words than I thought it would be when I started typing it up, but I'll try.
The discussion was about how users loved it because it did its job without getting in its way, but it was a bad idea to deploy it widely because then it would stop doing its job. Then, in the recent past, it was deployed widely and as predicted it stopped doing its job.
Your counter, that it wasn't working, implies you are talking about before the time of wide deployment. If you didn't, then your use of the word "except" was broken, because that's not an exception to what he just said.
Not sure whether I agree or disagree ultimately. This is not that much different from the argument that Windows had more malware than other OSes because it was more widely deployed. People have varying opinions on that, though with malware scanners the "security by obscurity" shoe is on the other foot.