Antivirus from Microsoft...what do you think?

[Deep13]

Microsoft Anti virus software, There is a good article about it on yahoo news...

It says..

If Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft ties its new anti-virus software, expected out later this year, too closely to Windows or prices it steeply below anti-virus software offered by vendors such as McAfee Inc. and Symantec Corp., antitrust regulators could turn their attention toward the company again.

"Aggressive entry into the established anti-virus market, especially to the extent Microsoft bundles its solution into the operating system, is almost certain to draw regulatory scrutiny, especially in the EU (European Union (news - web sites))," Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. analyst Charles Di Bona said in a recent note to clients.

what do you think? Will you stop using your current Antivirus and switch to MS Antivirus?

I am happy with my MCAfee :)

More on the article here

[mushroom]

I think this says it all

Microsoft should be concentrating on securing Windows instead of trying to challenge security software companies, according to research firm Gartner.

The rest: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5582742.html

And my personal opinion the same company that can not protect you internally is not the one to look at to protect you externally.

[cyanide]

I agree with mushroom

Two thumbs down

[Jerry]

I've used Symantec's products for the past 10 years, and se no reason to stop now.

[Nomad]

I've used Symantec's products for the past 10 years, and se no reason to stop now.

Here's one and I have others...

Norton Security - Critical Flaw- Affects all Platforms

Also there was this report last year on the new Norton 2005 issue of there Home Security platform, which Norton/Symantec said was not an issue they were going to correct (see Report)

Norton 2005 Flawed

Basically, if you run an nt system such as XP and use there home user 2005 AV package you are wide open to attack from malicious .vbs scripts.
In the opinion of the article and my own as I would have to concur with there findings this will affect 90+% of home user running computers purchased in the last 2 years+[?].

SCENARIO:
Joe Bloggs go's to town computer shop. emm I want one of them ..em.. computer thingies ..purchases - go's home, rips boxs apart - ignores instructions on assembly and spends 6 hrs or so cursing. Reverts to instruction booklet, puts computer bits together and switches on. Every thing has been pre-installed so the cpmuter boots up into? thats right Default XP user account which just happens to be an 'Administrative' account.
Result very inexperianced or semi-experianced users left wide open to compromise.

Personally I have never rated either Norton or McAfee. I have this rule of thumb where malicious software is concerned. Some quite simple paremeters really.

Did I install it? If answer is no it's malicious.

If the answer is yes, can I un-install that software without the neccessity of re-installing my operating system because the un-install messes up the system registry so much.
If the answer to this next question is no, then it is malious software.

My view is it is my computer and I am willing to try your software to see if I like it and I am comfortable and satisfied that it will do as it says and should 'I' choose to remove that software then my computer is returned to the state it was before I installed your software. I also do not want to have to require specialist removal tools to completely remove your software without having to format my harddrive.

Norton and in some cases McAfee fail all of the above set criteria by myself and as such I consider them to be malicious software.
It is well to note that should a search be made of Google a long history of problems exist with Nortons ability to detect Trojan virus attacks.

I dumped it within 3mnths of coming online and have used AVG and Zone Alarm security solutions since. I have not been compromised since I did and I can freely un-install/re-install at will. The updater can be a bit objectionable on AVG sometimes but that is only on the free version and is due to server load. Paid custmers come first so to speak which is fair enough in my book as your being protected for free. Just go back later on when the server is likely to be less busy and all is well.

Norton does work, don't get me wrong but you really do need it configured correctly for that to happen and you must monitor the situation more closely with secondary Active online scans such as Panda Software due it's Trojan Horse vunerabilities and also intend that it will remain on your computer permantly.

I personally have to say that AVG and Zone Alarm are exceptional quality with very high constant results. After allmost three years+ worth of use and no compromise, including the period just over 18mnths ago when everyone was being hit by the 'Invasion of the Worms', I was 100% protected.(Zone Alarm btw was the only firewall that blocked them at the time without need for reconfiguration or update).







*General Disclaimer*
I have to say it's upto the individual user and what or who they trust and also what they find works for them I can only speak for myself with the use of the two free products I mentioned. I do not recommend that people change just because of what I write. I solely write my opinion based on the information I have available. It is your choice should you wish to act on that information.
I will accept no responcibility if any body follows through with the removal of Norton AV due to what I write and thereby damages there system.

**IT IS YOUR CHOICE - NOT MY RECOMMENDATION**.

Sorry have to pop that in as someone tried it on with me via another security forum I frequent. I got a lot of nasty e-mails so I just wanted to point that out.

[rackaid]

A year or two ago, MS acquired RAV Antivirus (and a couple of others). RAV's product was very good. We used it on a number of linux systems to provide AV for mailservers. When MS bought RAV they quickly killed the linux product; however, if the RAV code was the starting point for the MS AV software, then it is worth a look. We found RAV to be very good in terms of cpu/ram utilization on windows boxes. Updates and realtime scanning were very easy.