The advice I hear is that the included Windows Defender is as good as any of the others, so no need to add something else. Especially as AV packages by their nature tend to become security issues of their own.
@silverwizard @Janne Moren Fortunately, this machine will only be used for certain things that require Windows (which are few and far between). It's not an issue for me to regularly factory reset it as it will contain nothing sensitive or that needs requires persistence.
Anything important lives on a machine with a trustworthy OS.
The only Windows computer I touch (ie. #SysAdmin) has only Windows Defender. It's essentially a public computer, used by many people with unknown computer hygiene.
So far, so good.
I think Windows Defender is at least as good at updating against (Defender-specific) attacks as any other anti-virus. I say that without having any evidence.
@silverwizard @Jonathan Lamothe @Janne Moren Maybe, but Windows will fight most third-party antivirus software, and/or it's a massive spyware/performance drain.
In the end, the best move seems to not add any additional liability to Windows Defender.
@beko Believe me, I'd love nothing more than to slap Debian on this machine. Unfortunately, its whole reason for existing is to run things that require Windows. Most of the time it's going to sit unused.
@Jonathan Lamothe when I did use microsoft I just used the microsoft virus checker. But the simple truth is that windows is designed to be susceptible to viruses to discourage people from using non-microsoft software. So, the only way to stop the viruses is to stop using Microsoft. That is the only real solution.
@Jonathan Lamothe I have used several operating systems such as Linux, which had no problem stopping viruses on the same machines as Microsoft. If they could do it, Microsoft could easily have stopped viruses. We might have accepted a transitory issue when viruses first appeared, but not a continued issue that continue despite many updates. The truth is Microsoft did very well from all the viruses, because they were used to deter people from trying non "official" microsoft software. That put Microsoft in a very dominant position and that is what made it so much money from some of the crappiest software on the planet.
silverwizard
in reply to Jonathan Lamothe • • •Janne Moren
in reply to Jonathan Lamothe • • •Bob Jonkman reshared this.
Jonathan Lamothe
in reply to Janne Moren • •silverwizard
in reply to Jonathan Lamothe • • •Bob Jonkman reshared this.
Jonathan Lamothe
in reply to silverwizard • •@silverwizard @Janne Moren Fortunately, this machine will only be used for certain things that require Windows (which are few and far between). It's not an issue for me to regularly factory reset it as it will contain nothing sensitive or that needs requires persistence.
Anything important lives on a machine with a trustworthy OS.
Bob Jonkman
in reply to silverwizard • • •@silverwizard
The only Windows computer I touch (ie. #SysAdmin) has only Windows Defender. It's essentially a public computer, used by many people with unknown computer hygiene.
So far, so good.
I think Windows Defender is at least as good at updating against (Defender-specific) attacks as any other anti-virus. I say that without having any evidence.
@me @jannem
Hypolite Petovan
in reply to silverwizard • • •@silverwizard @Jonathan Lamothe @Janne Moren Maybe, but Windows will fight most third-party antivirus software, and/or it's a massive spyware/performance drain.
In the end, the best move seems to not add any additional liability to Windows Defender.
beko
in reply to Jonathan Lamothe • • •Jonathan Lamothe
in reply to beko • •beko
in reply to Jonathan Lamothe • • •Jonathan Lamothe
in reply to beko • •@beko
Can you... elaborate on that one?
beko
in reply to Jonathan Lamothe • • •