Our print provider is recommending that we add Bitdefender antivirus to our multifunction copiers. While I understand that more security can be beneficial, I can't help but feel that with proper network segmentation and hardening, the copiers should be secure enough without this extra layer. I'm skeptical about the usefulness of antivirus for printers, especially since I'm already disabling USB ports to prevent malware. I'm mostly leaning towards skipping it, but I wanted to hear what others think before making my final decision.
5 Answers
The idea that we need antivirus on MFPs seems excessive. Why not just provide printers that can't execute arbitrary code instead? That way, you eliminate the need for antivirus altogether!
I'd definitely vote against installing antivirus on MFPs. If the printer needs that level of protection, I think we should reconsider the sophistication of the device itself. A good MFP shouldn't need security software, and if your IT team can't put together a solid hardening checklist, it's time to take matters into your own hands. Network security should be the priority, not running an antivirus on printers!
Could you clarify your thoughts on how you ensure printers aren't running code? I know many major brands do run on Linux or some basic OS.
Agreed! Even basic IoT devices often have their own OS, and printers are no exception.
Honestly, if I ever have to install antivirus on a copier, that's my cue to leave the IT field. That’s just too much!
I haven’t personally come across this antivirus integration before, and I would be cautious. What I have seen is network-level security products that monitor printer traffic without the device knowing. This approach feels way more practical than trying to run antivirus on every MFP.
Using network segmentation is way more effective for printer security. Adding Bitdefender would likely lead to more problems than it solves. It's just a way for vendors to profit off security fears!
Exactly! Anti-malware on printers feels like overkill.