Tavis&#x27; work isn&#x27;t enough to significantly improve the quality of any of these &quot;security&quot; products -- that would take a big investment that isn&#x27;t really feasible for a third-party. Honestly, he&#x27;s just demonstrating that these products are all littered with trivially found and exploited vulnerabilities, and that they generally make their users less safe.<p>Microsoft Defender is the only product that Tavis didn&#x27;t repeatedly knock over in a matter of days. If I were to venture a guess as to why, I&#x27;d say that Microsoft&#x27;s incentives are more in line with their users here. They understand secure development process and aren&#x27;t selling Defender. So, they&#x27;re starting from a better security baseline and have no reason to add tons of attack surface in the name of market differentiators.