Security Software on Accordance for Windows Machine

[Nathan Parker]

I'm likely going to be setting up a Windows VM coming up, and for now, the only app I'll be installing inside of it is Accordance. It's possible I'll install a couple of minor work apps, but Accordance will be the main use for the VM.

 

I'd rather use third-party security software than Windows Defender since while Defender is decent, I'd still rather keep my security software separate from Microsoft.

 

I'm looking at ZoneAlarm since I like their firewall, plus Check Point (their owner) is based out of Israel, another plus I like.

 

Should I invest in ZoneAlarm paid (such as Extreme NextGen), or should I just stick with the free firewall+antivirus?

 

I like the fact that the paid (Extreme NextGen) offers ransomware protection (you can't mix standalone ZoneAlarm ransomware protection with the free firewall+antivirus, to mix the two, you have to upgrade to Extreme). However, my reasons for leaning toward free vs paid are:

 

• Accordance will be the main app I run on the machine. It's beyond highly unlikely I'd ever infect my machine installing Accordance updates and modules from Easy Install. Besides Windows updates, that'll be the bulk of my online activity.
• I don't want to go overkill on security software that could conflict with or compromise performance with, Accordance. I know some hefty suites can get aggressive on security and suck away performance. I want Accordance to run beautifully on the machine and breathe in a fresh open field of computing bliss.
• I won't be browsing the web or checking emails on the Windows VM at all. It'll be isolated from the host (and the host is where I'll be checking emails and browsing the web). I could even install ZoneAlarm's free Chrome extension onto Edge in the rare event the browser were to be opened, I'd have some extra protection at the browser level. I'll keep IE as disabled as possible, and I won't be using Java, etc., anywhere.
• Windows has some basic ransomware protection built-in. Probably not as flashy as ZoneAlarm's but still decent.
• I'll keep the Windows VM backed up, so if anything occurs to mess it up, I can one-click restore the entire VM from a backup.
• I'll keep Windows patched with OS updates to ensure it has all the latest security patches. Since Accordance will be the primary app I'll be running on it, I should be able to install updates fairly quickly when released. As long as certain Windows updates don't break anything critical with Accordance (which probably doesn't happen often if at all), I don't have to worry about updates breaking anything else (such as Microsoft Office, etc), since none of that will be on the VM.

 

Thanks!

[ScottDF]

Without giving a little more detail than "I'd rather" for why to not use MS security software, it's difficult to make a recommendation. MS security does a reasonably satisfactory job according to all of the testing groups. It's near the top these days. Can you provide a bit more detail?

 

[Michel Gilbert]

I agree with Scott. I use Defender/Windows security in a VM (going on six years) and I have never had a problem, ever. I also disable the internet connection and only enable it for Windows updates, every month or so.

Edited April 18, 2022 by Michel Gilbert

[Nathan Parker]

I'm sure Defender has improved over the years, but I've never been fully confident in it as my primary AV. I just haven't been confident in trusting my primary AV to Microsoft.

[Nathan Parker]

ZoneAlarm has a NextGen Free edition I'm trying. So far seems to be solid.

[Nathan Parker]

I want to revive this forum thread.

 

I may be getting a Windows PC coming up so I can start testing Accordance on Windows. Should I stick with the built-in security software on Windows, or should I use a third party solution?

 

My guess is stick with the built-in security software, then possible run Malwarebytes free on the side on-demand only periodically in case it catches something the built-in doesn’t?

 

Does Windows have a good outbound firewall now, or do I need to install a third party one?

 

It’s been a while since I’ve used Windows.

 

Thanks!

[ScottDF]

Without question stick with the built in. Realistically, is MS going to put their systems (and reputation) at risk having inadequate security? <rant>FUD is everywhere. I maintained dozens of Windows computers and servers and worked with people all over the world in mission-critical situations where actual disasters would occur if things didn't work correctly, especially in the area of security. I never once had a break-through. With common sense safely practices you, like me in my experience, will not find anything with Malwarebytes. On the other hand, neglect common sense and you will be rebuilding compromised systems all the time, as I have with friends and family. Safety and PEBKAC go hand in hand. Safety in computers, as in most things, is in the hands of the user. </rant>

[Kristin]

17 minutes ago, ScottDF said:

Realistically, is MS going to put their systems (and reputation) at risk having inadequate security?

Who knows, but given my experience with Windows... I would expect they would.

[ScottDF]

One person's experience alone is not a good basis for drawing conclusions, or even 100s of one person's experiences. That's not science. There are pretty simple ways to determine this type of thing. There are qualified testing labs that have done the testing and found MS security products to be fully sufficient. "Who knows" is answerable. "It seems" is a position of inadequate knowledge. I'm no MS fanboy, but clearly their Security product is adequate. Oh, and @Nathan Parker, if you are concerned about outbound firewall, there are problems on your machine other than firewall that should be addressed in a fashion other than via firewall. PM me if needed. 

Security is necessary, but not especially hard to achieve. 

[Nathan Parker]

Thanks for the feedback! I may give you a PM sometime.