Would Windows be safer to use if users picked their own antivirus, antimalware, firewall software?

[froggyboy604]

I think Windows can be safer to use if you pick your own antivirus, antimalware, and firewall software since some virus makers may not make their virus which can get passed security software made from Bitdefender, Eset, Sophos, F-Secure, etc because of the lower amount of users using them compared to Windows Defender, Windows Firewall, McAfee LiveSafe, and Norton.

Users of popular software which came with their computer may also be less tech savvy, and more likely to click on the "ignore" button in their security software, and not run daily virus scans.

I think Windows Defender, Windows Firewall, and some of the free and cheaper antivirus which are sometimes sold for $10 or less are very basic and not designed to be the most secure, and can stop as many viruses and malware as antivirus which cost $30.

 

[テクニカル諏訪子]

It's not worth it.
Developing your own antivirus software is one thing, but this also requires you to maintain a virus database, which is undoable due to the big amounts of known malware, and the even bigger amounts of unknown malware, and a huge amount of malware that's not supposed to be seen as malware because deep state.

 

[froggyboy604]

Opensource operating system and software can be a better choice for users who care more about security and privacy.

But, the firmware for Processors, and other microchips are not opensource, so attackers maybe able to login to people's PC through the firmware on the motherboard or CPU like how some Intel CPU allow remote access management.

The government can force most popular software makers and programmers to secretly add back doors and hidden accounts for the government to use to login to a computer.

 

[Demon_Skeith]

You need to step back and think a moment as to who this question pertains to. Everyone who is officially an IT knows what they need to do to protect their system and they do pick their own software, while everyone else has no idea what they are doing. I think its always best to advise those who need help what they need to be using.

 

[froggyboy604]

I agree people who need help on computer security should go out to seek help on computer security, or go to a computer store which may sell them security software which does a good job at protecting most users.

It is too bad that computer TV shows, and TechTV/G4 are now less popular or no longer on TV, so people are less likely watch a computer show which gives them information on which antivirus, antispyware, and antimalware to use, and which security software to avoid because of poor user reviews.

 

[Claraviolet]

Honestly, that is a great idea. It would be more secure as many people use various stuff and it would be difficult for others to find the vulnerabilities.

 

[テクニカル諏訪子]

But, the firmware for Processors, and other microchips are not opensource, so attackers maybe able to login to people's PC through the firmware on the motherboard or CPU like how some Intel CPU allow remote access management.

One of the many purposes of open source is that crowds of people can review your code way before it gets released to the public.
Adding a backdoor is therefore practically impossible (it's still possible, but good luck fooling thousands of people and getting exploits in unnoticed).

 

[froggyboy604]

One of the many purposes of open source is that crowds of people can review your code way before it gets released to the public.
Adding a backdoor is therefore practically impossible (it's still possible, but good luck fooling thousands of people and getting exploits in unnoticed).

I think backdoors are a lot less likely in open source software because the crowd of people who review the code are not receiving or less likely to get money directly from a company or government, and a new user suddenly adding new code can look suspicious to people who review the code, and make sure it is not bloated.