Microsoft Security Essentials Struggles in New Antivirus Tests
In Q1 2011 Security Essentials 2.0 (MSE) performed well at the least demanding test,
that of spotting malware drawn from the industry-agreed Wildlist selection, scoring 100 percent. It also put in a good performance …
“….In Q1 2011 Security Essentials 2.0 (MSE) performed well at the least demanding test, that of spotting malware drawn from the industry-agreed Wildlist selection, scoring 100 percent. It also put in a good performance against a large group of recent malware samples selected by AV-Test itself, with a creditable score of 97 percent detection.
However, the product’s performance deteriorated sharply when pitted against 107 recent zero-day malware web and email malware attacks, described by AV-Test as ‘real-world’ testing’, spotting only half. The product’s performance in ‘dynamic detection testing’ – noticing malware on or post-execution – was also modest at only 45 percent. …..”
[NOTES….. I promote Microsoft Essentials as a quality product in the free stuff line. That is because they have won the VB100 Award (perfect scores all) and are West Coast Labs Certified. When considering non-quality products that have not achieved any certifications or these independent world lab awards (totally respected worldwide) – then you realize their detection rate is generally down around 55 to 85 percent detections. Anything a good deal above a 90 percent detection rate is considered a quality product and has achieved certifications either presently or in past days and ongoing – which certifications and awards are actually 100 percent scores. The idea goes, once a product has achieved these awards – they will continue in the excellence of the product ongoing – with that goal for the next sheduled or unsheduled test on them.
From the security stand point either from industry or community, the hardest thing is to get many users to even install and then use antivirus and antispyware programs. Those demanding state of the art protection know too well that 99 percent detection is just not cutting it. So on the one hand, Microsoft Essentials need continually be “promoted” as many users will refuse to pay for a product and others may try an antimalware program for the first time if it is free. Microsoft Essentials (formerly Windows OneCare shareware) has proven its colors twice, in the least, with perfect scores at VB100 and West Coast Labs. There is NO way to call it a crap program all of a sudden.
I believe this article reflects that it is Recession Times and there may have been some cutbacks temporarily (and since it is a free program) or in the over all picture that Microsoft is dragging heels here. The bottom line is you get what you pay for and that reflects on any irresponsible computer operator (user). I have never fathomed why someone will spend up to 2 or 3 thousand dollars on a desktop or laptop and then suddenly totally reject a simple 40 to 50 dollars a year to protect it. If “working” as a free helper in tech-help or malware removal help type forums and groups – you see that all too often.
The reason for my comments are that many, many – too many – users are not aware of the cyber criminal underground sharks out there that are going to talk many newbies into dumping Microsoft Essentials or any other quality free program such as Comodo (which has indeed just won the prestigious VB100 Award and is free) with some bullcrap line as “it is a piece of crap taking up valuable resources – I would dump it”. You also see that too many times in the community help areas. Nightmarish ! They actually go for it ! ….sheesh.