Edit: typo

  • >spyjoshx_@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I understand that antivirus software is necessary on Windows, but I’ll never understand the existence of Windows Defender. If Microsoft knows enough to prevent a virus that exploits something in windows, why are they putting their effort into an antivirus program, and not fixing ththe problem in Windows? If someone has a good explanation for this, I’d love to hear it.

    • NightDice@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because… They are? Whenever there is a problem in Windows itself, they release an update to fix that ASAP.

      Defender doesn’t just work against viruses that exploit weaknesses in Windows. It also works against viruses in programs the user installs. The purpose of Defender is the same as any other antivirus software, to detect known virus signatures in downloaded software, as well as attempt to detect programs that display virus-like behaviour. It also attempts to ensure that users only install software from sources they trust. For these purposes, Windows Defender is at least as good as most other antivirus software on the market.

      I would also generally recommend using an antivirus program on a Linux/OSX machine, unless you really know the risk you’re accepting by not using one. Even then, I recommend occasionally running ClamAV or a Malwarebytes scan. There is a misconception of “there are no viruses for non-Windows platforms”, but the thing is that a lot of viruses these days are cross-platform compatible, and all it takes is one program or dependency becoming an infection vector. Keep yourselves safe, people!

      • cobra89@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The only caveat I’ll add is that because of the way package managers work in Linux, it’s much less likely someone will be running something from an untrusted source. It’s less true these days with snap and flatpak but those are at least sandboxed.

        It’s not that common these days for Linux users to be downloading random binaries and running them.

      • dzervas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I never got where the misconception of “*nix doesn’t have malware” came from. Maybe from the 2k era where “malware” was anything that was slowing down your PC (I also don’t get why a malware would slow down your PC, unless it’s a ransomware)?

        I remember the c99.php shell from way back which is an amazing example of cross-platform (PHP can run anywhere) “virus” and it was considered a golden standard (2010 era?)

        • NightDice@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it’s born from a misinderstanding of infection statistics, especially back when windows was also more popular on servers.

        • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s also the kind of malware that uses your PC to mine crypto without you knowing. And especially back in the day there were plenty of trolls just infecting computers with malware to slow them down for fun. And since malware is just software, it’s all gonna be made differently so there probably plenty that just has bad code.

    • beefcat@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      because that isn’t really how these things work. It doesn’t matter how secure your operating system is, it can still get infected with malware if you let the user download and install arbitrary software. every modern desktop operating system that allows this has this hole.

      features that pop up warnings when running code not signed by the OS vendor (like Windows SmartScreen or macOS Gatekeeper) help to an extent, but are not magic bullets since users can still override them.

      at the end of the day, the best defense is to make sure you actually trust any software you download before running it.

        • spectre [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          All OSes have vulnerabilities, and the thing is MS Defender is a working solution that prevents many attacks. Microsoft also has to provide some nominal support to enterprise apps that are 30 years old, because that’s a significant amount of what keeps them in business. Patching actual root causes would often mean changing the way things work at a fundamental level in the OS, and would break apps for a lot of their users. This could create a big problem for a lot of people.

    • sternail@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I‘m sorry you got downvoted for asking a question because you don‘t know. Good old reddit behavior…