none
Windows 7 Virus?

    General discussion

  • ok, so pretty much everyone now knows that windows 7 is now coming out and before i buy it i want to ask one important question.
    As people experienced in the previous versions of windows, there were a lot of viruses. Windows xp is full and windows vista is slowly increasing.
    My question is that does Windows 7 have any protection against viruses other than Windows Defender?
    No offence, but windows defender is pretty useless because people still has to get a anti virus to protect their computer. So are there any GOOD protection against viruses? I mean, for now i see that there are almost no viruses but it was just like windows vista. after vista came out, then there was viruses. Macs almost have close to no virus out there so did microsoft finally did something to improve the secuirty? Espically since microsoft does own a part of mac/apple?

    ty
    Monday, July 06, 2009 4:56 AM

All replies

  • Hi Asif9785,

     

    Microsoft will release a free antivirus software: Microsoft Security Essentials.

     

    For more information:

     

    Microsoft Announces Plans for No-Cost Consumer Security Offering

     

    Microsoft Security Essentials Beta

     

    Thanks.

    Monday, July 06, 2009 6:07 AM
  • Regarding viruses, whatever could attack old versions of Windows will pretty much work in Windows 7.  Microsoft is planning on releasing a free A/V program sometime in the near future, but it remains to be seen if a) the general public will use it, and b) whether Microsoft will properly maintain it with regards to keeping their virus signature files up to date.  If they do it right, you should expect signature file updates at least once per day.
    Monday, July 06, 2009 10:30 AM
  • yea yea, i no about these free anti virus but see the problem with those is that they suck, regardless of which company. And mircrosoft aleady has an anti virus which is lame (windows defender). Also, not all viruses work on Windows 7, for example, i purposely downloaded a couple to test and none of them work. So, any other comments/answers?

    And mainly what I am wondering is did microsoft do something like mac, not make another anti virus, but like change the codes or something to make them not compatible or how ever it works on macs.
    Monday, July 06, 2009 1:50 PM
  • yea yea, i no about these free anti virus but see the problem with those is that they suck, regardless of which company. And mircrosoft aleady has an anti virus which is lame (windows defender). Also, not all viruses work on Windows 7, for example, i purposely downloaded a couple to test and none of them work. So, any other comments/answers?

    And mainly what I am wondering is did microsoft do something like mac, not make another anti virus, but like change the codes or something to make them not compatible or how ever it works on macs.
    Technically, Windows Defender isn't a A/V program - it is supposed to protect against malware (which is different from a virus).  Their prior attempt at A/V came in the form of Windows Live One Care (or something like that). The problem was that nobody used it, and it really wasn't any good anyway.  Their new one is called Morro (I think), and it's supposed to be much better (if you are to believe the propaganda from MS).  Of course, Symantec is kinda freaking out because if Morror is widely adopted, they stand to lose a lot of money, so they're gonna poo-poo anything that comes out of Microsoft.

    I've heard that the free version of AVG is supposed to be decent. I can't comment, because I don't run any A/V software at all.

    Irony - Microsoft says that you should use Windows instead of Linux, because (paraphrase) "free software sucks".  Symantec is now using the same argument against Microsoft's A/V product. 


    Monday, July 06, 2009 3:54 PM
  • Microsoft Security Essentials combines the anti-malware features of Windows Defender with anti-virus protection. It was released as a beta, but was cut off after a limited number of downloads (do a seach on Google - you may find downloads at Softpedia). So far, I have seen daily updates, of assuming that they are really up to date, the program should do the job. It does not check incoming or outgoing email, but it does check apps when they open, so if an attachment has a virus, it should catch it at that point. Just as good, and with less overhead. It will be interesting to see what the results are when the product is tested vs. establish anti virus and anti-malware programs.
    Windows 7 beta dual booting with VISTA Home Premium 2 GB memory 160 HD Gateway Laptop HP Officejet 6310 All-in One inkjet printer Verizon FIOS Internet Connection
    Monday, July 06, 2009 10:11 PM
  • My recent experiences with Symantec products lead me to believe that Morro is the least of their worries. I was until recently using one of their security suites under XP and, on the plus side, it did pick up every threat that tried to attack, whether it was a virus, firewall attack or whatever (except malware/spyware which wasn't covered by this product) and I understand it has one of the highest detection rates of any software currently available. Unfortunately I found it gradually slowed the PC to a crawl and complained like mad if you moved away from their 'recommended defaults', especially where updates were concerned. I like to know what an update is before its installed (I always set automatic updates to alert so I can choose wether to install or not for all applications and for windows itself), but this product kept telling me there was a security issue because I wasn't letting it update whatever it felt like in the background without teling me! I also found a few compatibility issues with the suite when running some applications that work fine with other security suites. Rather than worry about Morro, Symantec need to get these basics sorted because, as things stand, their software (which isn't exactly cheap) cannot compete with the free stuff like AVG or Avast! in terms of performance and features even if they are a point or two behind in terms of detection rates. Symantec need to improve their products to justify charging for them. If they can produce a suite that has better detection rates with more user friendliness and less impact on overall performance plenty of people would be prepared to pay for the suite, instead of trusting the freebies which at this time are actually the superior products even when cost is ignored.

    I have been  using Avast! for about a month now and have to say it seems pretty good. I've not had any attacks to test it yet (well, no reports of blocking or evidence of successful attacks anyway) and the performance loss seems to be minimal (barely noticable even on a slow machine). It does lack some of the more sophisticated features, but as I sit behind the windows firewall backed up by a NAT router which filters out all the directed port/IP attacks before they reach the PC, I don't think that lack of features is a problem for me. I would say Microsoft need to use this, AVG and the other big name 'freebies' as the benchmark for Morro, not Symantec and the other full price retailers.

    Symantec's claim that 'free software sucks' cannot be applied to the free A/V programs. In most cases the free version has a limited license and can only be used at home for non-commerical purposes. With Avast! for example, if you bring home work from the office and work on it on your PC you're in breach of their free license agreement. If you don't qualify for a free license you have to pay to get virtually the same products (although some extra features are usually incorporated) and the prices charged are similar to those charged by the fully commercial operators (like Symantec). The revenue generated by the paying customers who can't use the free software is ploughed back into development of the entire suite so that, very often, the free A/V suites are almost as fully developed and tested as the stuff from the big boys. As far as I'm concerned the only free security/AV software that sucks is the tiny amount that comes from those who don't also sell to business customers etc.
    Tuesday, July 07, 2009 12:22 AM
  • windows defender is not an AV program and it only checks for known spyware and adware. also MS cant legally put anything into their OS that woudl jeprodize third party sofware. there was a huge legall battle a few years back about MS's acclaimed monopoly on the computer software industry. however i do hear that a free AV app is coming out soon.

    but for now an answer to your question is no. there isnt any included means for virus protection YET.

    and dont switch to Mac. while superior machines they dont have very many business apps and very few games.
    • Edited by nitrous_74 Saturday, July 11, 2009 12:56 AM
    Tuesday, July 07, 2009 9:19 PM
  • yea yea, i no about these free anti virus but see the problem with those is that they suck, regardless of which company. And mircrosoft aleady has an anti virus which is lame (windows defender). Also, not all viruses work on Windows 7, for example, i purposely downloaded a couple to test and none of them work. So, any other comments/answers?

    And mainly what I am wondering is did microsoft do something like mac, not make another anti virus, but like change the codes or something to make them not compatible or how ever it works on macs.

    Hi

    You seem to have some misconceptions.

    First, While it's true that Windows has a history of being very vulnerable to virus attacks up to and including Windows XP, since the release of Windows Vista which included all of the increased security components, there has not been one major attack recorded.

    Second, Windows Defender is NOT and anti virus program, it is an anti spyware program that protects against 'known' spyware.

    Third, the  Microsoft Security Essentials Beta promises to be the best Windows anti virus program ever made.

    Hope this helps.

    Thank You for testing Windows 7


    Ronnie Vernon MVP

    Wednesday, July 08, 2009 12:10 AM
    Moderator
  • lol

    ur logo is a apple symbole from mac and ur telling me not to switch

    irony
    Wednesday, July 08, 2009 1:49 AM
  • ok, so from what I can tell, microsoft is making an a/v named morro and windows defender is not an a/v. But no one has answered one question, did microsoft did any change or anything that well make viruses more imcompartible with the OS just like Mac?

    I mean, from my personal opinion, no offence, but other then SOME OS that microsoft has made, the rest, compared to other compaines like Eset Nod32, Bitdefender, Kaspersky are not too good. Even Microsoft products arn't really that good in comparasion ex: zune - ipod, xbox - ps3, windows mobile - iphone etc. So, making another a/v program does not make me feel too safe considering my current anti virus NOD32 has cought more things than Windows defender has in both viruses and spyware.

    Because really, as much as i would love to get another free anti virus, as history foretold with avg free version, and ad-aware free version, anything thats free is not good. So, just out of curosity, have microsoft changed anything to make protection better in terms of coding or anything else but make another program?

    Ty for your suggestions!!!
    Thursday, July 09, 2009 12:44 AM
  • Microsoft Security Essentials Beta is still available on Microsoft Connect.

    To get it, you have to go to the Connection Directory and apply for membership to the Connection by filling out a form. At least, it worked for me yesterday.

    Thursday, July 09, 2009 1:03 AM
  • Microsoft Security Essentials Beta is still available on Microsoft Connect.

    To get it, you have to go to the Connection Directory and apply for membership to the Connection by filling out a form. At least, it worked for me yesterday.

    ty m8
    Thursday, July 09, 2009 3:17 AM
  • Well, morro fails so far, but i won't conclude anything yet, considing it just came out.

    It failed by detecting a perposly downloaded virus if any ones wondering. I disabled nod32 for the moment.
    After i re enable nod, it says virus found. lol
    Thursday, July 09, 2009 3:20 AM
  • Have you tried Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware? Their website is at www.malwarebytes.org, and it works with XP/Vista/7. Catches a lot of viruses that the big AV suites like Norton or McAfee miss. It's also free, but ya need to purchase a key to activate the proactive protection.
    Thursday, July 09, 2009 3:54 PM
  • You can also try Avast.  The HomeEdition is free as they make their money from businesses.  Their theory behind free is that if all people run A/V on their machines, the Virus writers will be out of work.

    The catch is that I 'm not sure if they have a version for W7 yet.  There is a Vista version that might work.
    W764RC (WEI is 4.6) Intel DP35DP Core 2Duo 2.20 Evga Nvidia 8500 256meg HP Officejet Pro L7580 Raid 5 with 3x 320g HDs Office 2007 Standard QuickBooks Pro 2007 eSword Latest Edition Steam America's Army via Steam Voyage Century
    Thursday, July 09, 2009 11:05 PM
  • You can also try Avast.  The HomeEdition is free as they make their money from businesses.  Their theory behind free is that if all people run A/V on their machines, the Virus writers will be out of work.
    You do know that virus writers make their viruses HIDE FROM THOSE BIG A/V SUITES so FOR EXAMPLE:

    Looking at the virus writer's point of view who just wrote a new virus:

    As not to have millions of average Joe's who have Norton or McAfee saying after a recent virus scan:

    "AH! Norton or Mcafee picked up a virus! Is anymore more parts of my computer infected? Tech guy, help!!!! "

    Most people are then protected from this new virus this writer wrote because Norton and McAfee detect because most everyone has Norton of McAfee and these 2 suites can pick up the virus. So to prevent this, virus writers make their viruses hide from these well known and frequently used A/V suites so they can infect more computers and cause more havoc without A/V suites detecting and removing the virus.



    The same thing explained here will happen to Avast if they continue in this direction, as virus writers will just find out how to hide from Avast! as well!!!!

    Thanks for the info about their theory, as I will not recommend Avast anymore if they continue with this direction they are heading.

    Call me crazy, but this is what I have found out after researching how viruses work and things.

    Thanks for reading this, all quoted people still have rights to their opinions, I am not here to take them away, I am just listing my opinion.

    Friday, July 10, 2009 5:37 PM
  • You can also try Avast.  The HomeEdition is free as they make their money from businesses.  Their theory behind free is that if all people run A/V on their machines, the Virus writers will be out of work.
    You do know that virus writers make their viruses HIDE FROM THOSE BIG A/V SUITES so FOR EXAMPLE:

    Looking at the virus writer's point of view who just wrote a new virus:

    As not to have millions of average Joe's who have Norton or McAfee saying after a recent virus scan:

    "AH! Norton or Mcafee picked up a virus! Is anymore more parts of my computer infected? Tech guy, help!!!! "

    Most people are then protected from this new virus this writer wrote because Norton and McAfee detect because most everyone has Norton of McAfee and these 2 suites can pick up the virus. So to prevent this, virus writers make their viruses hide from these well known and frequently used A/V suites so they can infect more computers and cause more havoc without A/V suites detecting and removing the virus.



    The same thing explained here will happen to Avast if they continue in this direction, as virus writers will just find out how to hide from Avast! as well!!!!

    Thanks for the info about their theory, as I will not recommend Avast anymore if they continue with this direction they are heading.

    Call me crazy, but this is what I have found out after researching how viruses work and things.

    Thanks for reading this, all quoted people still have rights to their opinions, I am not here to take them away, I am just listing my opinion.

    Finally, someone that understands what i m talking about with these free a/v. And ur points are very good as well. The only way, I believe to prevent viruses from even spreading is make them compatible to the OS. Just like mac. Oviously i m not going to switch to a mac just for their awsome virus protection. Also no one has yet answered my question:

    Did microsoft make any changes to the codes to prevent viruses from infecting or even being not compatible? Yes or no? explain plz. btw, i m not asking you JoelbX , its a question for anyone that reads this.
    Saturday, July 11, 2009 12:01 AM
  • lol

    ur logo is a apple symbole from mac and ur telling me not to switch

    irony
    yeh i know. i switched just a couple months ago only to find out that i had to rebuy photoshop, MS office, and had to buy converter software so i could play my games.

    as it turns out i just use a Mac computer but a Windows OS (Windows XP; screw Vista). 

    also the runtime code has changed quite a bit from XP to 7. so by the time viruses start to catch on to the run32.dll a newer version of windows will be coming out

    hope this helps, nitrous_74
    Saturday, July 11, 2009 1:01 AM
  • Well I will answer anyways.

    2 points.

    1: The more people that switch to mac and linux, the more virus writers will switch their focus from windows to UNIX. You do know that there is a botnet consisted 100% of macs.

    2: Windows code? Changes? Wrong person to ask here.
    Saturday, July 11, 2009 1:04 AM
  • yea yea, i no about these free anti virus but see the problem with those is that they suck, regardless of which company. And mircrosoft aleady has an anti virus which is lame (windows defender). Also, not all viruses work on Windows 7, for example, i purposely downloaded a couple to test and none of them work. So, any other comments/answers?

    And mainly what I am wondering is did microsoft do something like mac, not make another anti virus, but like change the codes or something to make them not compatible or how ever it works on macs.

    Hi

    You seem to have some misconceptions.

    First, While it's true that Windows has a history of being very vulnerable to virus attacks up to and including Windows XP, since the release of Windows Vista which included all of the increased security components, there has not been one major attack recorded.

    Second, Windows Defender is NOT and anti virus program, it is an anti spyware program that protects against 'known' spyware.

    Third, the  Microsoft Security Essentials Beta  promises to be the best Windows anti virus program ever made.

    Hope this helps.

    Thank You for testing Windows 7


    Ronnie Vernon MVP


    The Conficker worm is a major attack! It hit a hole in the server service that is in Windows 2000 through Windows VISTA AND WINDOWS 7!!!!!!!!!!1
    Saturday, July 11, 2009 1:38 AM
  • yea yea, i no about these free anti virus but see the problem with those is that they suck, regardless of which company. And mircrosoft aleady has an anti virus which is lame (windows defender). Also, not all viruses work on Windows 7, for example, i purposely downloaded a couple to test and none of them work. So, any other comments/answers?

    And mainly what I am wondering is did microsoft do something like mac, not make another anti virus, but like change the codes or something to make them not compatible or how ever it works on macs.

    Hi

    You seem to have some misconceptions.

    First, While it's true that Windows has a history of being very vulnerable to virus attacks up to and including Windows XP, since the release of Windows Vista which included all of the increased security components, there has not been one major attack recorded.

    Second, Windows Defender is NOT and anti virus program, it is an anti spyware program that protects against 'known' spyware.

    Third, the  Microsoft Security Essentials Beta  promises to be the best Windows anti virus program ever made.

    Hope this helps.

    Thank You for testing Windows 7


    Ronnie Vernon MVP


    The Conficker worm is a major attack! It hit a hole in the server service that is in Windows 2000 through Windows VISTA AND WINDOWS 7!!!!!!!!!!1
    Sorry to tell you this but if u hav an a/v, the conficker worm shouldnt't be a problem. Infact what it does really is steals information from your computer but jokes on the creator, it cannot get out of the computer. And if you hav that virus, u suk, no offence.
    Saturday, July 11, 2009 2:44 PM
  • I'm tapping my sarcasm meter but I just can't tell...

    From what I remember about it, Confiker Classic was patched out in October of 2008 and removal came around February (?). I know Confiker spread through a hole in one of the networking services but didn't it also spread via USB? If I'm correct on that, then I remember that that route was cut off from most people using Windows Vista or 7 because it prompted UAC. And I wouldn't call it a major attack, it didn't do anything. Calling it a major exploitation of vulnerability within Windows would be more accurate. Either way, most people did a pretty good job of not getting Confikered so I think that thing was blown way out of proportion...
    Saturday, July 11, 2009 2:53 PM
  • Yeah. Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware picked that up a LONG time ago, LONG before its "release" on April Fools.(really was released on 11/08)

     MY POINT WAS to tell Ronnie that Vista has had a major virus attack on it.
    Saturday, July 11, 2009 3:10 PM
  • I'm tapping my sarcasm meter but I just can't tell...

    From what I remember about it, Confiker Classic was patched out in October of 2008 and removal came around February (?). I know Confiker spread through a hole in one of the networking services but didn't it also spread via USB? If I'm correct on that, then I remember that that route was cut off from most people using Windows Vista or 7 because it prompted UAC. And I wouldn't call it a major attack, it didn't do anything. Calling it a major exploitation of vulnerability within Windows would be more accurate. Either way, most people did a pretty good job of not getting Confikered so I think that thing was blown way out of proportion...

    Ah yes Varaint B and up spread (and this is how I got it) through Autorun of USB OR any drive it could get its hands on, like one pc in a network gets it, spreads it to mapped network drivers, and everyone gets it.

    It spread this way through the use of its own planted autorun.ini, which told the OS to run its app in a misspelled "Recycled" folder. (misspellation: resycled)

    Vista and up OSs, when autoplaying an infected drive, would see 2 "Open Explorer to view files", and the 1st one ran the virus. I never saw these 2 options on XP, it was just plug it in and boom you're infected.

    Conficker uses a critical (but obviously not critical as to this day I have not seen the patch (KB958644 or MS08-067) come through Windows Update) hole in the server service, which runs file and print sharing over a network. The patch was made in 10/08, and Conficker was released 11/08. Does that tell you how many people install optional updates?
    Saturday, July 11, 2009 3:19 PM
  • The most recommended anti virus is Kaspersky Lab. I use it, it detects, neutralizes, and destroys. 
    Tuesday, November 24, 2009 6:25 PM
  • Windows Defedner is not useless , it will protect your Privacy but will not protect your harm to your PC. Microsoft released Windows Defender and build it inside Windows that protect your privacy. If spyware, keylogger or any other privac risks that stole your passport , personal information will detect and remove by Windows Defender. If someone try to hack you then must put some source of spyware and keylogger, here is second defend layer after Windows Firewall that protect you against hacker and botnet (zombie PC).

    Microsoft Released Microsoft Security Essentials free Anti-Virus for XP, Vista and Windows 7. However , you have choice to use it or use another Security program. About Virus, one of the key problem that Virus get into your PC and damage you is you. I mean user's careless is main thing that help Virus in.

    You done comparison with Mac and Windows. Mac itself have several Malware and Virus, Virus in Windows are usually a edited version of preview Virus not new one. Plus, number of people that using Pirate Windows is high , non-genuine Windows is already come with Virus or will infected easilly. If you be carefull and think twice when Windows ask you allow or not allow run or not run , you won't infected with Virus. And Windows will ask you to install Anti-Virus too.

    Tuesday, December 29, 2009 3:39 PM
  • One of the good methods to remove virus infection from your system is online scanning. In order to perform online scanning you need to visit the Antivirus software sites like bitDefender, ESET online scanner, etc. After opening these websites you could see the option to perform online scanning. The main advantage of this method is that you need not install any antivirus software in your system. Online scanning could be performed free of cost.Windows 7 virus also remove by Spyware Doctor, Microsoft Antispyware Beta, Spybot – Search & Destroy, Ad-Aware SE, SpyHunter, eTrust PestPatrol etc are the examples of Antispyware program. You could use all these tools to remove all virus programs from your system. These Antispyware softwares are able to detect and kill adware or spyware infected in your system. Antispyware program also prevents its attacks. So it keeps your system safe.

     

    Hope this helps you.

    Good Luck!

    Michel

    Thursday, May 05, 2011 9:26 AM