Microsoft has finally confessed that it has disabled anti-virus software of Kaspersky on Windows PC. Kaspersky has filed a complaint against Microsoft to the European antitrust commission. The company claims that Microsoft is mistreating its market by diverting its users from using its anti-virus software. On the other side, Microsoft says it has executed this strategy in order to keep Windows 10 users protected.
Rob Lefferts, program management director does not directly point out Kaspersky in the blog post he made but just makes it clear that we protect our every device from malware and virus attacks. Our main goal is to satisfy the needs of our customers by offering Windows Defender Antivirus to get rid of any kind of bug or virus. Microsoft is among the top leading companies to offer an accurately tested security tools.
Lefferts gave the explanation so as to why it disabled Kaspersky’s anti-virus software. He said, around 95 percent of Windows 10 PCs have well-suited protection against the malware for recently updated version i.e. Windows 10 Creator. Some of its numbers still need updating. After updating to its latest version, Windows 10 will immediately install another new version of anti-virus from another company similar to Kaspersky for those applications that are not compatible.
Leffert says, “We made this attempt successful by disabling the parts step by step. During initial updating, we first provisionally disabled some parts of the AV software. AV partner helped us in our work by specifying which versions had a compatible software and where to navigate the customers after the update.”
Microsoft decided to set up a meeting with the higher authorities of the company are put forth their concerns so that the matter gets settled as soon as possible. Because misunderstanding makes take place due to lack of communication between both the parties. Microsoft guards itself by appealing that it has faith on “always on” anti-virus protection from third-party subscription keeping security as the first priority. Kaspersky disagrees his statement.