You can no longer turn off or disable windows defender

Why would virtually anyone want to?

When you install any third-party suite of any renown the graceful bowing out of Windows Security has been standard operating behavior for years now. And when you remove same third party suite, it cuts back in to the dance.

I have yet to encounter a situation where Windows Security doesn't bow out whenever the addition of a third-party program, where that program is properly coded to announce its presence at install (or departure at uninstall) to Windows.
 
Galdorf said:
You can't disable in group polices ,registry any more with new changes any of the disable scripts no longer work.
Click to expand...
Does Sordum's Defender Control work for you? (they have a handful of neat little utilities)
www.sordum.org

Defender Control v2.1

In Windows there is no option to completely turn off Microsoft Defender , Defender control is a Portable freeware to disable Ms Defender.
www.sordum.org www.sordum.org
 
There is some software out there in business that causes BSOD in windows defender that is why it is a good idea to be able to disable in group polices.
 
Galdorf said:
There is some software out there in business that causes BSOD in windows defender
Click to expand...
May I respectfully suggest that this is not Windows Defender's fault?

Any application software that fails when used with an industry-standard anti-virus product (which is exactly what Windows Defender is, whether you like it or not) is by definition broken.

Admittedly it's a neat trick to throw a BSOD without system privileges, but that's not the point. What exactly is this "software out there in business" that can pull this off, and why hasn't it been fixed?
 
Computer Bloke said:
May I respectfully suggest that this is not Windows Defender's fault?

Any application software that fails when used with an industry-standard anti-virus product (which is exactly what Windows Defender is, whether you like it or not) is by definition broken.

Admittedly it's a neat trick to throw a BSOD without system privileges, but that's not the point. What exactly is this "software out there in business" that can pull this off, and why hasn't it been fixed?
Click to expand...

Windows defender has been known to cause issues just running and after certain updates can't have this happen in a business environment where an update causes issues on dozens of machines.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/windo...crosoft-fixes-bug-causing-full-scans-to-fail/

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...defender-broken-by-recent-updates-how-to-fix/

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...dows-defender-bug-gives-hackers-admin-rights/
 
Last edited:
Windows Security has been, by far and away, the security suite LEAST likely to have issues with ANYTHING. That's not just my opinion, either, so get out there reading if you don't care to believe me, and I mean sites that are in the antivirus/security suite testing business. It's unsurprising that something that's part and parcel of Windows, and part and parcel of the extensive testing of Windows, is the least problematic.

If something's throwing BSODs when Windows Security is running, but not otherwise, it should be tossed as a viable option as quickly as possible.
 
Yeah screw Nirsoft utilities and practically every board level repair software written overseas. Just because you own your computer and pay to license an OS doesn't mean you get to run anything you like on it. What do you think this is, 1990 again??? Bill and Tim know what's best for you and your family. Now go get your vaccines and stick with major software players or they'll block your apps. They know what's best for you!
 
inbargains said:
They know what's best for you!
Click to expand...

And, yet, there are a very great many of us who have had no issues, none, creating scan exceptions when needed and never thinking about them again.

I'd far rather something potentially fishy be picked up, and then I have to OK it, than vice versa. And when I know I'm downloading and keeping, for example, an installer it will flag I allow it then store it in the folder structure I have set up to intentionally be excluded from scans.

This is not rocket science. This is not limited to Windows Security. It's been standard operating procedure for, literally, decades now.
 
Yeah I run all sorts of strange things on this rig with Defender with no issue, just have to create exceptions sometimes. It's been that way for years.

The rub? This is a DEFAULT INSTALL. This kind of crap is what happens when people customize their installation to "remove things" they "don't need". And then wonder why they have inexplicable problems later no one else has.

Microsoft catches crap for every fault of every system they have an OS on, so I have zero issues with them managing that reality by forcing users to have AV software deployed.

P.S. I use Nirsoft stuff on a regular basis, they all "just work". So mentioning that specifically was fascinating.
 
Sky-Knight said:
I use Nirsoft stuff on a regular basis
Click to expand...

Same here, though probably less regularly than you do, and I've not had any issues.

And I cannot possibly agree with you more about the complete and utter stupidity for any typical user or entity that is, "customizing Windows 10 by forced removal of that which ships with."

If you can't do something through user settings and/or group policy and/or specific registry tweaks (used very judiciously, if at all) then don't do it. All of these people removing, for instance, Xbox, are gaining what, precisely? The vast majority of unused Windows features/apps simply sit there, fallow and using zero resources, with rare exceptions. If it ain't broke, then for the love of heaven, DON'T try to fix it! `Solutions` in search of a problem are stupidity.
 
Sky-Knight said:
I have zero issues with them managing that reality by forcing users to have AV software deployed.
Click to expand...

Again, agreed. If the choice is between protecting the vast majority of the user base that would do nothing, or do something wrong/incorrect/insufficient to protect themselves, and allowing "maximum choice" and with no built-in security functions I know which I think is the sane, and practical, choice.

The fact that Microsoft is now doing this with a built-in suite that consistently rates in the top ten for every testing lab I've read results from, often top five, and beating out many paid third-party options that are well-respected speaks very well of them.
 
Galdorf said:
Windows defender has been known to cause issues just running and after certain updates can't have this happen in a business environment where an update causes issues on dozens of machines.
Click to expand...
Defender isn't active when a third-party antivirus is installed, so if someone doesn't like Defender they simply need to install something else.

Or are you saying the known issues with Defender are present even when a third-party antivirus is installed? Reading those links it would appear not.

So... back to the question of why bother disabling Defender?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GTP
My entire user base lives on Outlook, attached to M365. My entire user base uses Defender.

I'm stuck in a hospital room bored out of my MIND right now, with not a single user complaining.

So "defender crashing Outlook", seems like a bit of a stretch. And honestly I wish it were true because it'd give me something to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

thecomputerguy
[O365] You don't often get email from XXX (Learn why this is important).
Replies
10
Views
380
thecomputerguy
thecomputerguy
Metanis
[REQUEST] Any insights for customer running both Google Drive and OneDrive?
2
Replies
22
Views
525
Metanis
Metanis
HCHTech
Cell Phone Automation
Replies
2
Views
229
britechguy
britechguy
Rigo
Flaky browsers especially on new tabs
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
GTP
GTP
britechguy
Microsoft Defender (NOT Windows Defender) - Is there any way to make it stop with the email messages?
Replies
3
Views
414
Sky-Knight
Sky-Knight
Back
Top