MS Security Essentials performs poorly in test, loses certification

[Char Jackson]

Microsoft Security Essentials bombs AV-TEST, loses certification
Nov. 29, 2012

<http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-p...s-bombs-av-test-loses-certification-20121129/>

Security Essentials scored a very respectable 5.5 out of 6 for
usability — which included solid marks for false positives and low
impact on system resources. When it came to actual defense and
repair performance, however, the story was disappointingly
different.

MSE bombed on zero-day protection, picking up just 64% of new
threats compared to the industry average of 89%.

(Rest of article at link above, including some kind words for recent
Norton products.)

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Microsoft Security Essentials bombs AV-TEST, loses certification
Nov. 29, 2012

<http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-p...s-bombs-av-test-loses-certification-20121129/>

Security Essentials scored a very respectable 5.5 out of 6 for
usability ? which included solid marks for false positives and low
impact on system resources. When it came to actual defense and
repair performance, however, the story was disappointingly
different.

MSE bombed on zero-day protection, picking up just 64% of new
threats compared to the industry average of 89%.

(Rest of article at link above, including some kind words for recent
Norton products.)

Can't say I'm surprised. I've seen far to many systems running up-to-
date copies of MSE that were compromised, which is why I no longer
trust it (and haven't for some time).

 

[Yousuf Khan]

Microsoft Security Essentials bombs AV-TEST, loses certification
Nov. 29, 2012

<http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-p...s-bombs-av-test-loses-certification-20121129/>

The article doesn't seem to exist anymore.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Dave \Crash\ Dummy]

The article doesn't seem to exist anymore.

It's still there for me. Are you sure your newsreader didn't wrap the URL?
Here's a shorter link:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/ckn3n57

 

[Char Jackson]

The article doesn't seem to exist anymore.

It still loads fine for me.

Within the article is a link back to the site that did the testing:
<http://www.av-test.org/no_cache/en/tests/test-reports/?tx_avtestreports_pi1[report_no]=123698>
or
<http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/sepoct-2012/>

 

[Yousuf Khan]

It's still there for me. Are you sure your newsreader didn't wrap the URL?
Here's a shorter link:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/ckn3n57

Okay, that link worked for me. Anyways, it doesn't look like MSE is
doing that badly at detecting stuff that already exists in the database,
just seems to have trouble detecting new stuff that may not be in the
database already. That might explain its good false-positives
performance vs. others.

Yousuf Khan