MS Defender vs Norton - why do reviewers always favor Norton

All the reviews I've read say that Norton security is the best, better than Defender. At the same time, lots of people in this forum (and others) recommend Defender.

What's behind the different recommendations? I'm tired of paying over $100 a year for Norton security, but I also want the best possible security.

Defender covers the basics, Norton the rest. I myself do not like Norton, but it is better.
Current malware adds the exclusions via reg to Defender and then infects PC at will.

Microsoft Defender weakness lets hackers bypass malware detection

Yet this could be mitigated so easily, MS should simply deny any known malware.

AV-TEST | Antivirus & Security Software & AntiMalware Reviews does not normally favour Norton over Defender.
- However, the current results show a marked decline in Defender's ability to protect against zero-day attacks and in the speed of copying files. Neither of those were apparent the last time I looked at their results.
- Defender had previously been as highly rated as Norton for several years. To check the details, you need to click on the little right-facing arrow on the right-hand side of the results.



Perhaps, by the time your current Norton subscription ends, Defender will be getting full marks once again.

Particular utilities can be preferable if their protection levels are as high as all the others, if their loading effect on common tasks is no worse than all the others and if they bundle additional protection mechanisms that a particular user finds useful [such as a VPN].


All the best,
Denis

TairikuOkami said:

Current malware adds the exclusions via reg to Defender and then infects PC at will.

Microsoft Defender weakness lets hackers bypass malware detection

Admin permission is now required to view the exclusions list in the Registry & in the Defender interface.
This change was added to Windows 10 earlier this year in a CU. It was also included in the Windows 11 RTM last year.

All the best,
Denis

Try3 said:

Admin permission is now required to view the exclusions list in the Registry & in the Defender interface.

Yet easily bypassed thanks to almighty insecure powershell 5.

TairikuOkami said:

Yet easily bypassed thanks to almighty insecure powershell 5.

Really? How?

I always have UAC at maximum because malware used to be able to penetrate lower levels if the user account was an Admin one. Is it associated with that?

I use PS to set my Exclusions on each computer but have to run that script elevated for it to have any effect.

Denis

Try3 said:

I always have UAC at maximum because malware used to be able to penetrate lower levels if the user account was an Admin one. Is it associated with that?

Yes, UAC at max deals with 99% bypasses, but majority of people run UAC at default, so basically none.

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldne...16-00/?p=94105

csun said:

Anyone ever seen stats for enterprise vs home users for AVs ?

Personal opinion, WD meets the needs for majority of home users, enterprise maybe not so much, hence the cost of Norton.

Sure but as the OP, I was asking about Norton for home use. I am not an enterprise. In any case, I don't have a wiring cage in my house.