Finally, after a year-long development phase, Microsoft Security Essentials has been publicly released. If you can't wait to get your hands on Microsoft's latest security software, you don't need to wait any longer. Microsoft recently confirmed the final version would be made available "in the coming weeks" but has taken the wraps off the final edition today. The final build number is 1.0.1611.0.
Security Essentials is designed to work on Windows XP, Vista and 7 and protects end users against virus threats and spy ware. MSE is Microsoft's free anti-virus and anti-spyware product that is set to replace Microsoft's paid Windows Live OneCare subscription service which was withdrawn earlier this year. Neowin exclusively revealed Security Essentials in June when it was codenamed "Morro".
In June, a public-beta was offered, and the download limit was reached within 24 hours. It will be absolutely free for all users of Windows XP, Vista and 7, and distributed in both 32bit and 64bit flavors — as long as you have a genuine copy of Windows. Microsoft will not bundle it with Windows 7, though, when it's released on October 22nd, 2009.
"Consumers have told us that they want the protection of real-time security software but we know that too many are either unwilling or unable to pay for it, and so end up unprotected," said Amy Barzdukas, general manager for consumer security at Microsoft. "With Microsoft Security Essentials, consumers can get high-quality protection that is easy to get and easy to use – and it won't get in their way."
MSE is likely to be targeted to compete with the low end of anti-virus products from other providers, and it is not expected to make a big impact on sales of full-blown security suites. MSE is designed for home use. It requires no registration, trials or renewals and is available for download directly from Microsoft. Most users are expected to be home users or small businesses with a only a small amount of managed PCs. In a statement earlier this year, Janice Chaffin, president of Symantec's Consumer Division claimed: "Microsoft's free product is basically a stripped down version of the OneCare product Microsoft pulled from the shelves. A full Internet security suite is what consumers require today to stay fully protected."
Security Essentials ranked fourth in a test with other leading free malware protection. If you are interested in MSE you can read an informative early review by Paul Thurott here.
Download: Windows XP (32 bit) Download: Windows Vista & Windows 7 (32 bit) Download: Windows Vista & Windows 7 (64 bit)
Definition updates, detection rates etc..
I look forward to testing it.
Definition updates, detection rates etc..
I look forward to testing it.
I would like to see a proper test of this, compared to all the good free versions out there, as well as the corporate versions, and not a microsoft "study" by one of Microsoft lackeys, like what we have had in the past for this, and for IE.
A full independent study. Hopefully Arstechnica will do one soon, they have a lot of computer knowledge, and produce in depth articles. It would be nice to see Neowin start to do stuff like this, rather than just linking to other peoples stories.
Same here.
http://remove-malware.com/antimalware/anti...s-review-video/
I'm recommending my customers AVG Free or Kaspersky (if they can afford it).
I concur. AVG is horrible, and bordering on unprofessional. I stopped using it when it let two viruses onto my system in a zip file from a friend's USB memory stick. Luckily I didn't execute either of the two files, but I plugged the same stick into another PC that had McAfee VirusScan Enterprise on it, and the files were detected and deleted straight away.
I then removed AVG and installed Avast! instead which also picked up the files in the zip file I had copied to my desktop.
Right now I'm using NOD32 antivirus, which is my favourite "paid for" AV. Security Essentials is my favourite "free" AV.
I'm recommending my customers AVG Free or Kaspersky (if they can afford it).
Anyone that recommends AVG anymore, obviously doesn't know what they're doing!
Haven't tried this thing out yet and probably won't. If it's only ranked 4th, there's obviously better and I already have those!
What is MSE's detection rates?
And? It's free, and it's on an 8 year old OS. What exactly would you have to complain about?
In any case, I doubt they'll drop support any time soon: XP is the one most needing it!
For an AV it`s a no frills, bells and whistles type but it sure gets the job done.Very light on resources good detection.....
Last edited by max84 on 29 Sep 2009 - 09:23
And the UK is on BST, not UTC/GMT. So in UTC it's Redmond +6 I believe.
/me hopes I got that the right way around
Uses much less resources, the installation file is less than 5MB, and is extremely easy to use. Recommended!!
Anyone know how it integrates with Outlook? Does it scan mail and attachments on delivery or first on click/use?
" It will be absolutely free for all users Windows XP, Vista and 7, both in 32bit and 64bit flavors."
Support for x64 XP was dropped a long time ago... I doubt they support it now with this. That's probably why you don't see it.
You could try it tho...
it has x64 binaries instead of 32 bit ones, if that's what you mean
No, something better than that. For an example Ad-Aware from Lavasoft.
Security Essentials = Defender + Antivirus.
Have you tried Malwarebytes........Far better product
I can't wait for the full version. It beats both Nod32 and Kaspersky in my opinion. It beats everything!
You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
Enlighten me.
As far as I know, he's actually right. MSE has the same engine as OneCare.
The One Care engine (which is the same engine in MSE) is just below Avast in detection rates in the last year or so and is one of the top three at detection. You obviously don't know what you are talking about since MSE beats NOD32 by a long shot in detection. Do yourself a favor and try it out first before dismissing it as crap.
Correct on the engine being the same but the poster was wrong on detection rates. The OneCare/MSE engine is in the top three in detection for over a year now.
First of all, I didn't dismiss it as "crap". Different tests show different results; it depends on what tests you believe in. I tend to go with the av-comparatives.org people, they seem to have a decent reputation.
NOD32 has had huge problems with detection and software bugs (especially under 64 bit). So I've dumped all of them and gone with MSE.
Source please?
Exactly.
--UPDATE--
I tried to install it and it says that I have a newer version already installed. I suppose I'm fine then.
Is this the latest version?
Microsoft Security Essentials Version: 1.0.2140.0
Antimalware Client Version: 2.0.5612.0
Engine Version: 1.1.5101.0
Antivirus definitions: 1.67.178.0
Antispyware definitions: 1.67.178.0
Last edited by daniel_rh on 29 Sep 2009 - 15:05
Microsoft Security Essentials Version: 1.0.1611.0
Antimalware Client Version: 2.0.6212.0
Engine Version: 1.1.5101.0
Antivirus definitions: 1.67.178.0
Antispyware definitions: 1.67.178.0
I can't figure why yours would have a higher version number, but you could try uninstall/reinstall if you have doubts.
the verison you have is outdated prebeta build
1.0.2140.0 is a leaked Microsoft internal build. 1.0.1611.0 is the final public build.
Testing out the software now on my virtual pc, seems fine, although I never use AV products and never been infected, but best to try it anyways.
Looking further into the license theres a cpl of things im not down with namely the internet based features says it collects IP address et al, the DRM and error reporting features look sketchy too. I get the impression these features can be disabled though which is alright.
------------------------------------------------------
After installing, im not seeing any options to disable spynet community membership, error reporting or the DRM items listed in the license....I like my antivirus software to connect to servers for only 2 things; definition and or program updates and maybe license checking - not all this business.
- Microsoft Digital Rights Management. If you use the software to access content that has been protected with Microsoft Digital Rights Management (DRM), in order to let you play the content, the software may automatically request media usage rights from a rights server on the Internet and download and install available DRM Updates.
I dont want to see anything about DRM in anti-virus software MS
- This software automatically sends error reports to Microsoft that describe which software components had errors. No files or memory dumps will be sent unless you choose to send them. From time-to-time, we will also download a small file to your computer that permits us to collect information about specific errors you have while using the software.
No option to stop this business, best I get is to be able to choose not to send you the memory dumps, gee thanks
Dont get me wrong I respect its a free piece of software and all I was just looking forward to it and am slightly disappointed that some of these additional items appear to have no opt out or ability to disable them.
Last edited by Osiris on 29 Sep 2009 - 15:44
Ever hear of torrents?
I don't believe what is said here. Do you have a source I can check out?
I don't believe what is said here. Do you have a source I can check out?
Seems to be based on the PC World testing conducted:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/170674/free...s_software.html
http://www.pcworld.com/article/170674/free...s_software.html
Thank you, and max84.
Yes, but malwarebytes and superantispyware have already done that .. and yes this should replace them as well, at lease for an on deman scanner
http://download.microsoft.com/download/A/3...-vista-win7.exe ... x64 right there.
What
"I like Avira but it doesn't seem to have native x64 support while Avast does." ... "while Avira does"
Not performance wise. I still see MSE hogging the CPU and taking a rather long time to parse a folder full of EXEs, while with Avast the icons load without much of an issue.
i wasnt even sure that it upgraded it. anyone know how to check?
Open the program and click help, it's on the right hand side. Select "About Microsoft Security Essentials". "Microsoft Security Essentials Version" should read 1.0.1611.0.
to me, an antivirus app install without reboot is not a good thing. antivirus needs to be loaded very early during boot to protect deep system kernel.
Anti-virus software is almost unnecessary, if this Security Essentials package is light enough on system resources, it will be pretty capable if it gains widespread use. Like Paul Thurott said, if it gets installed on most of the machines running Windows, it will give Microsoft a tremendous amount of feedback which will be beneficial to its customers.
@Osiris
I doubt they have a Big-brother scheme. Indulging people's vices earns corps. more money, it's unlikely they will turn into the everywatching eye anytime soon.
it is so dumb right! :rollingeyes:
Just how much is it capable of exactly?
@Ci7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conficker#Discovery
"The first variant of Conficker, discovered in early November 2008, propagated through the Internet by exploiting a vulnerability in a network service (MS08-067) on Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008, and Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta."
Name one other succesful worm that used a vulnerability in in past 3-4 years.
Scary worm, infecting pcs using usb drives. OH GOD! It must be a genius.
>=|
Thanks for your advice.
Neil
Thanks for your advice.
Neil
No doubt, yes
Using autorun to infect systems. Viruses had more class back in the old days, there aren't any boot-sector viruses anymore.
Using autorun to infect systems. Viruses had more class back in the old days, there aren't any boot-sector viruses anymore.
Naggy nature? This is easily the least naggy AV I've ever used.
As long as it performs it job and detects threats, I'm sold on it.
I mean the automatic update. Will it work?
Hmm... Just to check - are you sure that the processes from all users are shown?
I'm talking about the process called MsMpEng.exe - now it takes approx. 46000K!!
I'm talking about the process called MsMpEng.exe - now it takes approx. 46000K!!
I see what you're saying. Mine is using the same amount. Apparently, it's the Anti Malware portion of the program. It may be an issue for some that don't have a lot of memory but not for me, it's not an issue.
MsMpEng.exe is taking up 87MB on my system. I could care less since I have 8GB of ram, but I just think that's a huge difference from what everyone is reporting.
Oh, this is on Win7 x64 RTM.
MsMpEng.exe is taking up 87MB on my system. I could care less since I have 8GB of ram, but I just think that's a huge difference from what everyone is reporting.
Oh, this is on Win7 x64 RTM.
msseces.exe User Interface 5MB
msmpeng.exe Anti malware executable 43 MB
This is with Win 7, 32
Last edited by slimm on 29 Sep 2009 - 20:25
MsMpEng.exe is taking up 87MB on my system. I could care less since I have 8GB of ram, but I just think that's a huge difference from what everyone is reporting.
Oh, this is on Win7 x64 RTM.
msseces.exe User Interface 5MB
msmpeng.exe Anti malware executable 43 MB
This is with Win 7, 32
So... any ideas why my usage would be double what most others' process is using?
MsMpEng.exe is taking up 87MB on my system. I could care less since I have 8GB of ram, but I just think that's a huge difference from what everyone is reporting.
Oh, this is on Win7 x64 RTM.
msseces.exe User Interface 5MB
msmpeng.exe Anti malware executable 43 MB
This is with Win 7, 32
So... any ideas why my usage would be double what most others' process is using?
the reason is ... you have 64 bit version. And so do I !
It's using about 73 MB.
It still does. Kind of baffles me when everyone else here runs around claiming how 'light' MSE is.
MsMpEng.exe is taking up 87MB on my system. I could care less since I have 8GB of ram, but I just think that's a huge difference from what everyone is reporting.
Oh, this is on Win7 x64 RTM.
msseces.exe User Interface 5MB
msmpeng.exe Anti malware executable 43 MB
This is with Win 7, 32
So... any ideas why my usage would be double what most others' process is using?
the reason is ... you have 64 bit version. And so do I !
It's using about 73 MB.
Hmm.. well, I guess that makes sense. I just checked mine today, and it's sitting at 61 MB. Oh well, like I said, don't really care, but was just curious.
see-->
Virtual memory hides the truth with most AV's.
The beta version of MSE used Windows Update / Automatic Updates for it, and I normally have this turned off because I don't like to be nagged to install security updates and reboot PC when MS releases them every month, but the problem is this would stop definition updates too. I hope it's been changed
I've been running MSE since it went into beta (switched from NAV/NIS 2009), and had used WLOC before that. While either NAV or NIS now uses fewer resources, the two together (and they are usually sold as a suite these days) take up more RAM than MSE does by itself (which replaces both). Because of the much lower RAM footprint (and better detection rates) than NAV/NIS, I recommend it wihtout hesitation.
Installed on my laptop, Win7, no problems. Installed on the home computer, Win7 X64, no issues.
Appears to be as light weight on resources as Nod32. Perfect timing...my PAID Nod32 program runs
out in a couple weeks anyway.
Nope, its an AV. So 2 AV's shouldn't be on the same system. I mean they can be, but its not recommended.
True. Could I disable MSE's antivirus part and enable the malware detection part?
No, it does not - but in Vista and 7 you can use Windows Firewall to do that.
So far, like many have said here, it's very lightweight, unobtrusive, efficient, and most importantly, does what it's supposed to, keep my systems clean and safe. If I were other A/V producers, especially Symantec and Kaspersky, I'd be shaking in my boots, cause this kills their products hands-down!
I played WOW while a full scan was in progress.
Results were:
TM = Could not play. Way too laggy.
KIS = Same as TM.
MSE = Could play easily, with the a minimal amount of lag.
BIG Thumbs up for MSE.
Today I had my first big issue. I was scanning one of my drives and watching the Google Wave presentation on YouTube. Suddenly the video begun to stutter. I looked in the taskmanager and noticed that all almost all my 4 GB RAM was in use and high CPU load (95%). I was only using one extra tab in IE and scanning with MSE.
MSE is light weight only when it is idle, well, running in the background so to say, but when scanning is slow as h*ll. This is also with definitions update in MSE itself. There is still work left for Microsoft. I hope MSE not becomes bloated as such as Norton AV, however they seem to recovering with a new light weight scanner.
MSE is still highly recommended. It does what it suppose to do, keep you safe and clean.
Avast is going to be releasing Avast version 5; they said October was their expected month for release of the beta and then the RTM version. I am using windows vista and have AVAST free installed at the moment. If MSE can do better in detection rates and actually does take care of the problems (I didn't particularly like Windows Defender but....) then AVAST, that might make me switch, unless there were a better reason to change away from AVAST?
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.