Sounds like some people I’ve encountered who really don’t know shit, and have just survived on the ignorance and impressionability of others they con into paying/employing them. Then they just Google every problem they’re tasked with fixing.
Could be. I had the same objections, and brought up how I thought Norton and McAfee were supposed to be garbage. His take was that McAfee had cleaned their act up and was best in class in addition to Windows Defender. I mentioned elsewhere but he’s in the Intelligence Community so he may have reasons he can’t tell me, or just looking at different attack vectors than your average sysadmin. I’ll ask him.
Oh man I totally forgot about this, thanks for the ping.
He said:
"Reasoning? Sigs are only as good as their aperture. McAfee is on a lot of a boxes, catching stuff and creating new sigs. They also have a large staff of very talented people out there finding stuff and creating sigs.
The app does annoyingly keep trying to upsell you.
Do they say why it sucks or is it just contempt for the company?"
Which is a valid question. I didn’t actually see anyone say why it sucks here. Literally everyone just said he’s dumb and outdated, when his original advice to me was:
“McAfee is an industry leader. Not bloatware anymore. Can buy for all your devices including phone (one purchase). Defender is excellent. No one solution is better than layered defense. I run defender, McAfee, and fireeye.
Malwarebytes is good [this was in response to my earlier question], but you get what you pay for.
Kaspersky is sus enough that it’s not permitted on usg or contractor machines.
John is insane and may have killed someone.
He’ll be found dead with a hooker and enough coke to take down an elephant.”
Then months later when I bitched about paying for it and asked if I really needed it, he said I had to get it because the signatures come out weekly.
So actually curious what other people think. I’ll link this comment to other people who pooh-poohed it and ask why.
Your buddy must be very bad at his job
Sounds like some people I’ve encountered who really don’t know shit, and have just survived on the ignorance and impressionability of others they con into paying/employing them. Then they just Google every problem they’re tasked with fixing.
Could be. I had the same objections, and brought up how I thought Norton and McAfee were supposed to be garbage. His take was that McAfee had cleaned their act up and was best in class in addition to Windows Defender. I mentioned elsewhere but he’s in the Intelligence Community so he may have reasons he can’t tell me, or just looking at different attack vectors than your average sysadmin. I’ll ask him.
Update?
Oh man I totally forgot about this, thanks for the ping.
He said:
"Reasoning? Sigs are only as good as their aperture. McAfee is on a lot of a boxes, catching stuff and creating new sigs. They also have a large staff of very talented people out there finding stuff and creating sigs.
The app does annoyingly keep trying to upsell you. Do they say why it sucks or is it just contempt for the company?"
Which is a valid question. I didn’t actually see anyone say why it sucks here. Literally everyone just said he’s dumb and outdated, when his original advice to me was:
“McAfee is an industry leader. Not bloatware anymore. Can buy for all your devices including phone (one purchase). Defender is excellent. No one solution is better than layered defense. I run defender, McAfee, and fireeye. Malwarebytes is good [this was in response to my earlier question], but you get what you pay for. Kaspersky is sus enough that it’s not permitted on usg or contractor machines. John is insane and may have killed someone. He’ll be found dead with a hooker and enough coke to take down an elephant.”
Then months later when I bitched about paying for it and asked if I really needed it, he said I had to get it because the signatures come out weekly.
So actually curious what other people think. I’ll link this comment to other people who pooh-poohed it and ask why.