I would like to understand much about Microsoft Security Essentials or another antivirus which build in or developed by Microsoft. I'm planning to set up the network for my company and use Microsoft Plattform for operating that structures But I don't understand much about Antivirus or another Security which can help to protect my network from attacker or viruses.

My network structures:

  • Based on Microsoft platform

  • Network type: WAN (there are multiple LAN there)

  • Use Mikrotik (configured Mikrotik firewall and another policy,VPN)

  • Use Window server 2016 for Files Sharing (active directory, DNS, allow remote, Files storage for sharing,)

  • We provided DHCP for our client

Due to Window server 2016 some of the network developers have recommended me to use Keperstkey, symatic,.... But I don't understand why they don't recommend me to use Microsoft Security Essentials or Microsoft Defender because that antiviruse was built from Microsoft.

Please give me some idea.


  • 1
    Microsoft will argue otherwise, but malware will target or evade Microsoft defender in the first place. All malware kit is known of using popular AV to make offline scanning before deployment. Attacker always has a choice of deploy malware that is not 100% evade all AV. MS defender is in top of their evasion list : they can deploy it against gullible user that only use MS defender. – mootmoot Sep 7 '17 at 8:58

I suggest you contact some local security provider and consult with them about securing your network and desktops. You can use Windows Defender to protect computers from malware and Microsoft System Center to configure it globally. In my opinion, the solution from Kaspersky Lab (their security center and endpoints) will be much easier to deploy and manage for you.

PS. You will not be able to provide basic security for your users if you have no experience in the field of IT-security, no matter which antivirus solution you use. It would be better to delegate this task to a person with enough experience to carry it out correctly.


Please research Microsoft Security Essentials and how it has held up in credible evaluations in security effectiveness compared to third party solutions. Although its effectiveness has improved the past few years, it never ranks among the top when compared to solutions from companies focused on providing security solutions as their core business. Security has always been an afterthought for Microsoft or a side dish.

I suppose there are situations when Microsoft security products are an appropriate line of defense for a company. My feeling is that the person responsible for deciding on MSE/WD will be hailed as a hero for saving money up until there is a costly or company image/reputation damaging breach, and then the money saved pales in comparison to the cost of the breach.


Computing security sometime is all about common sense. Not using Windows defender as de facto AV is definitely one of those.

There is a joke about meeting a bear in the forest: you don't need to outrun the bear, you just need to outrun your peer. Make a twist to the jokes : The bear(the malware creator) don't need to catch the fastest pray for meal, it just need to catch its meal from abundance slow moving pray.

Here, the abundance prays are de facto windows defender. Because there is abundance of user with the de facto AV, malware author just need to evade from it, as in common sense, it is cheap and "fast to the market". This is similar to thief targeting cheapo bicycle cable lock that can be snipped using a cable cutter in 2 seconds, than bringing battery operated power cutter to tackle all the locks.

In addition, Microsoft tightly integrate their AV with the OS as some sort of product lock in. Even it gain some advantages of knowing their own internal, windows AV development is suffering from all sort of OS red tape road block. In fact, it is Microsoft own OS development that tied up MS defender improvements.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.