New French AV-Test

[Firecat]

Well, I saw this "test" on this French site:

http://www.soswindows.net/antivirus/top10/
http://www.soswindows.net/antivirus/top10/accueil/

Some interesting tidbits are:

-{ Quote: " Our tests consisted in placing d’innombrables the viruses of most known and relatively recent on a PC test. We retained the criteria according to: the rate of detection of the viruses and duration of the analysis. Each analysis was carried out on a new installation of Windows XP SP3, with a variety of relatively recent threats: virus, towards, Trojan horses, backdoors, and macro virus, of the kind and the family which are Mydoom, Sober, Netsky, Sasser, Sobig and other Lovgate." }-

It does not seem to be a very professional test to me. What do you think? :)

[trjam]

I dont think many of us will agree with their rankings, even if I cant read it.

[Firecat]

Here are the translated versions of both pages:

http://www.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soswindows.net%2Fantivirus%2Ftop10%2F&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8
http://www.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soswindows.net%2Fantivirus%2Ftop10%2Faccueil%2F&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8

[NAMOR]

first time I have seen KAV at the bottom of any test. :dry: :blink: :ouch: ::)

[RejZoR]

Service Pack 3 ? Thats a new one, because there is no such thing as SP3...::)

[nicM]

-{ Quote: "Well, I saw this "test" on this French site:

http://www.soswindows.net/antivirus/top10/
http://www.soswindows.net/antivirus/top10/accueil/
[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]" }-

Where did you find that?!! :o Never heard about it. I didn't read everything, but I agree their results are weird..

Here are some more comprehensive tests, with real-time monitor testing, but in French too ;) :

http://www.clubic.com/article-37030-1-comparatif-antivirus-2006.html


nicM

[TNT]

This is the most pathetic AV-test I've ever seen, ever. :thumbd:

[trjam]

-{ Quote: "Service Pack 3 ? Thats a new one, because there is no such thing as SP3...::)" }-


I think their is with 2000.

[Don Pelotas]

Their "technicians" used the industry standard Rosenthal test so the results are undisputed.................................or i just might have had the laugh of the month year tonight, take your pick.::) ;D

[gkweb]

The french at the top of the page is not very good.
Windows XP SP3 does not exists.
The criteria are not only detection rate, but also scan time and GUI friendlyness (subjective).
No information about the number of viruses, and also says clearly that they used an emulator to "create" new or modified viruses to test heuristic (a mix of on-demand and heuristic detection).

Nothing reliable IMO.

Regards,
gkweb.

[bigc73542]

-{ Quote: "Their "technicians" used the industry standard Rosenthal test so the results are undisputed.................................or i just might have had the laugh of the month year tonight, take your pick.::) ;D" }-

I think probably a good laugh;) :thumb:

[Heco]

-{ Quote: "This is the most pathetic AV-test I've ever seen, ever. :thumbd:" }-
... i agree completely:blink:
Cheers,
Hervé

[btman]

Definitly... Doesn't AVK use kaspersky engine... and so avks at the top and kaspersky is at the bottom? That's retarded.

[dah145]

-{ Quote: "Where did you find that?!! :o Never heard about it. I didn't read everything, but I agree their results are weird..

Here are some more comprehensive tests, with real-time monitor testing, but in French too ;) :

http://www.clubic.com/article-37030-1-comparatif-antivirus-2006.html


nicM" }-

That one looks better, to me. ;D
Though I dont understand french :-\

[FRug]

Have a look at their screenshots of the different AV Programs, they show that they have used vastly different versions of the AV Programs, for example they used Antivir with a virus database/engine from January 2006, and Panda with virus definitions from May 2006, Avast with defs from April 2006....

So either these are single test runs from different dates and as such not comparable, or they have even less clue about what they're doing than virus.gr.

[rdsu]

Another one... ;D

[FRug]

Muhahaha, just look at the KAV screenshots, they've been using a version from mid 2005!

[Stefan Kurtzhals]

Yeah sure, comparing anti virus programs which are more than 1 year different in update. Have a look at the KAV screenshot, April 2005??!?!?

::)

[RejZoR]

Roflmao :D

[pykko]

another good AV test. ;D ;D ::) :wacko:

[kareldjag]

Hi,

The most recent and serious AV tests that i've seen in France was published by the "french PC Mag.": 01 Informatique.
This test published in 2005 is based on AV-Test methodology and malwares database.

Just click on "cliquez ici" to get the report as a PDF:
http://www.01net.com/article/281450.html

The results confirm my opinion and my own test with my collection of malwares: Kav and Bitdefender have the most reliable and exhaustive database.

An other test done in 2005 too by "Micro Hebdo", the little brother (same firm/group) of 01 Informatique:
http://www.01net.com/article/295349.html

But this test was only done with about 600 malwares only.

In any case, since the user is running an HIPS or a firewall with HIPS features, the results of AV tests is less important.

Regards

[Inspector Clouseau]

OFC RMB

[gerardwil]

-{ Quote: "OFC RMB" }-

???ooooo

[Firecat]

-{ Quote: "???ooooo" }-
All I know is RMB = Royal Major Bull**** ;)

I'm not sure about OFC, but what comes to my head is something that is not so polite :-X

[Inspector Clouseau]

-{ Quote: "All I know is RMB = Royal Major Bull**** ;)

I'm not sure about OFC, but what comes to my head is something that is not so polite :-X" }-

OFC means Of Course the rest u got correct