Revisiting Third-Party "Antivirus"

[zl55lz]

This topic of whether third party antivirus/antimalware is preferred over the built-in Microsoft Defender only has been discussed before.

Some say one way and some the other.

My questions are 1) if you do think Defender only is good enough security, why specifically? How does it work that makes it so?

2) If you think a third-party security is better, why specifically? What does it add?

3) If you do think third-party is best, which one do you prefer and why?

Appreciate any comments.

 

[OldShooter]

I don't think you're going to find many subject matter experts on antivirus software here. SGOTI will have opinions, as always, but, as is usually the case, will not know what he is talking about.

I suggest that you look for some academic research on the subject.

 

[qwerty3656]

Not an expert. People I trust say defender is good enough (and I take comfort in having a big company taking on this role)

 

[easysurfer]

I go with defender and do manual scans time to time with malewarebytes.

I think defender is good enough from virus standpoint and just as or more important is to not have maleware such as a keylogger.

 

[nassa]

I feel Defender is good enough for my purposes.

No antivirus is 100% protection so there is some level of risk with all of them. I also use a Windows user account (rather than administrator) to limit any possible damage and use Microsoft Edge, which I’ve read has some built-in protections that integrate with the Windows operating system. In addition, I have ransomware protection enabled in the Windows security settings.

 

[GenXguy]

I added Malwarebytes paid version with realtime scanning.

 

[scrabbler1]

I go with defender and do manual scans time to time with malewarebytes.

I think defender is good enough from virus standpoint and just as or more important is to not have maleware such as a keylogger.

This is what I have and do, too. Another important measure to undertake is frequent backups of your files, a topic which has been discussed from time to time in this forum.

 

[DrRoy]

Over the years we have had Defender, Norton, and McAfee. None of them have worked as well as the ESET we have had for 5 years now.

 

[target2019]

This topic of whether third party antivirus/antimalware is preferred over the built-in Microsoft Defender only has been discussed before.

Some say one way and some the other.

My questions are 1) if you do think Defender only is good enough security, why specifically? How does it work that makes it so?

2) If you think a third-party security is better, why specifically? What does it add?

3) If you do think third-party is best, which one do you prefer and why?

Appreciate any comments.

It will be difficult to get any actionable information here. I eventually yanked NAV from my desk anchor due to performance hit. MS Defender daily scans are good enough.

It is probablly a rare person on this board who can tell you how MS Defender works. I get a notification every day or so that there have been no new threats.

Browsers have built in-protections too.

When you search and see unusual site names, be extremely careful, since in some cases you might be putting your family jewels into a real-life test.

This is assuming you have a personal computer.

 

[gwill1010]

#1 - Don't be dumb. In theory, you don't need anything if you're careful.

#2 - Free avast is great.

#3 - Free malware bytes will block sites that appear to be legit but are potentially dangerous.

There's no reason to pay for anything, overkill and slows your machine down.

 

[Al18]

Avast was found to be selling info to advertisers a few years ago, so I would avoid them. Microsoft Defender has historically got low scores, but has improved over the past few years.

 

[Sojourner]

As an antivirus software nonexpert but longtime Windows user, I can only offer my own, anecdotal experience. MS Defender (and its predecessors, going back to the Win 95 days) has done what appears to be a perfect job of protecting my desktop and laptop PCs from viruses and malware over the past 25+ years.

 

[gwill1010]

Avast was found to be selling info to advertisers a few years ago, so I would avoid them. Microsoft Defender has historically got low scores, but has improved over the past few years.

I did not know this, but I see that Avast is now owned by Norton LifeLock. Evidently it was anonymized data. I don't know that it's any different from searching for products then suddenly your Facebook feed is full of that product. It's extremely difficult not to get tracked.

 

[Montecfo]

To me it is belt and suspenders. I use free Avast, and I also have malwarebytes, which is more of a rescue-type tool to clean up if the other measures fail.

What's "best" is what works.