New test - pcwelt ?

[tsilo]

Anyone knows something about this test?

http://www.pcwelt.de/news/sicherheit/81346/index2.html

[The Hammer]

{QUOTE-> Anyone knows something about this test?

http://www.pcwelt.de/news/sicherheit/81346/index2.html <-QUOTE}
A republished version of this test. http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/marx/detections_2007q2.htm Discussed here at length. http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=175408

[tsilo]

Ok thanks :)

[MalwareDie]

Makes me wonder why every AV is placed in the same order for every category.

[NAMOR]

{QUOTE-> Makes me wonder why every AV is placed in the same order for every category. <-QUOTE}


To make it easier to read? I think the listing/order is done by "overall" detection %'s. So for example, WebWasher highest overall detection % gives it rank 1 and eTrust-VET overall % gives it rank 29.

[212eta]

There are tests conducted by a legitimate German IT Portal.
They are testing new products unlike the Dead-Slow [www.av-comparatives.org] (http://www.av-comparatives.org%5D),
which insists on conducting retrospective (i.e. repetitive) tests on outdated products
like NOD32 v2.7, BitDefender 10 while everybody wants to find out about NOD32 v3,
BitDefender 2008 etc.
www.virusinfo.info (http://www.virusinfo.info) and www.chip.de (http://www.chip.de) are also good sources.

[lucas1985]

{QUOTE-> They are testing new products unlike the Dead-Slow [www.av-comparatives.org] (http://www.av-comparatives.org%5D),
which insists on conducting retrospective (i.e. repetitive) tests on outdated products
like NOD32 v2.7, BitDefender 10 while everybody wants to find out about NOD32 v3,
BitDefender 2008 etc. <-QUOTE}
Sorry to sound a little harsh, but you need to do your homework before pointing fingers. AV-Comparatives' retrospective test uses AVs "frozen" 3 months ago. NOD32 v3 didn't exist 3 months ago.

[IBK]

I already tried to explain him this - without success.
It is also debatable if a proactive rate really changes drastically over the time. If we look at previous retrospective tests, the results are usually always more or less the same (if not new heuristics etc. are released).

[212eta]

What's the point of testing and re-testing "frozen" AV, and in fact, twice a year?
Speaking about HOMEWORK, have you checked what others are testing?

Everybody is interested in the new nod32, BitDefender etc; not the old versions.
For your information, I used to be a member of the av-comparatives.org Forum.
Allow me to know -from inside- what is going on there...

[IBK]

according to the TOS, insults are not allowed there, so you got simply banned.

[212eta]

No problem! I found no interest there anymore!
If retrospective tests -and the proactive ones as well- do not change over time
(how would they if the same products are used over and over again),
then tests are done for the...tests...
Excume me if I questioned your authority...
It needs a lot of courage to go against the tide...

[IBK]

I still think you do not get the point. :-\
For results with up-to-date products, see tests of February and August.
For knowing the proactive detection rates, see retrospective tests of May and November.

[C.S.J]

{QUOTE->
It needs a lot of courage to go against the tide... <-QUOTE}
i do it all the time :D

im sure your questions will be answered if you tone it down a little bit and just 'ask' :shifty:

[212eta]

Believe me I am aware the difference between these two (2) tests.
For the last days, I went over them 1-by-1!
What I pointed out was the need to move to new products FASTER!!!

You still do NOT get the point...

<Every Authority, resists to Change and fights back the ones who favor Change>

From the ancient Greek Philosopher Socrates

[Scoobs72]

@212ETA - I think you need to re-read the information on AV-Comparatives. There's some really good information on there about the tests and why they are conducted as they are. I've been monitoring these tests for the last couple of years and as far as I remember IBK is always up to date with testing new versions of AVs. In any case the perfomance often doesn't change anyway with new versions as the AV signatures seem to be the primary driver of performance.

Seriously, when everybody else is telling you you're missing the point and you're the lone voice, does it not make you think that maybe you've misunderstood things? I'm sure plenty of people on here will be willing to help you understand.

Cheers

[C.S.J]

{QUOTE-> Believe me I am aware the difference between these two (2) tests.
For the last days, I went over them 1-by-1!
What I pointed out was the need to move to new products FASTER!!!

You still do NOT get the point...

<Every Authority, resists to Change and fights back the ones who favor Change>

From the ancient Greek Philosopher Socrates <-QUOTE}
if nod32 3.0 was released 'before' the signatures were FROZEN, it would have been tested this time around.

you cant just say, its november, its out... so test it.
this invalidates THIS test as its the retrospective test.

as for on-demand tests, it applies again... if its released (any new version for any AV) before signatures are frozen, it will be tested.

[212eta]

If -some of you- are completely satisfied with the results and the methodology of the av-comparatives.org,
it doesn't mean that everybody else has to do so.
When you see -how the results of other testing-sites are changing dramatically-,
you may realize what I mean.
I see that some of you follow a specific pattern of thought regarding the AV signatures etc.
Allow others to have a different opinion; unless you believe that everybody has to agree with you.
As far as the common fallasy: You-the-"loner" vs. the Many ones, I prefer -with all the respect- Quality over Quantity!

[C.S.J]

i dont know who you are, but you really do talk alot of shit. ::)

if you dont like the tests, dont look at the results.

if you want to make suggestions to av-comparatives, thats fine, but do so in a different manner.

what is it that you actually want doing, or have i missed it?

[212eta]

{QUOTE-> if nod32 3.0 was released 'before' the signatures were FROZEN, it would have been tested this time around.

you cant just say, its november, its out... so test it.
this invalidates THIS test as its the retrospective test.

as for on-demand tests, it applies again... if its released (any new version for any AV) before signatures are frozen, it will be tested. <-QUOTE}

:thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb:


Halleluiah!!!

Now, C.S.J we are 2 against...the tide...

[Scoobs72]

ok, so if you're really correct, please provide:

1. Date of AV Comparatives test
2. Date of AV signatures in test
3. AV version and date it was released

If 3 is substantially less than 2 (e.g. AV released (final release not beta release) in June 2007 and the signatures in the test are from August 2007, but the old version of the AV was used) then it would be fair to ask why this was so. And IBK will probably provide a good reason why.

If you can't provide this information then you're just an idiot trying to cause trouble.

[C.S.J]

{QUOTE-> :thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb:


Halleluiah!!!

Now, C.S.J we are 2 against...the tide... <-QUOTE}
i really dont understand what you mean,

or what you want.........

nod 3.0 was not released before the sigs were frozen (im sure IBK will confirm), but i dont think it was, so i dont think it will be in these next results.

thats what you want though right, nod32 3.0 in this test?

[IBK]

212eta you misread what CSJ wrote you. He said that it would invalidate the test if new versions would be used in the retrospective test.

In the tests of February and August, the LASTEST available versions at testing date (5th August) are used. This means the very latest available product versions and updates.You can be also sure that no vendor is going to submit an old product to the tests.

[Scoobs72]

212ETA - CSJ wasn't agreeing with you, he was telling you why you were WRONG.

[C.S.J]

{QUOTE-> 212eta you misread what CSJ wrote you. <-QUOTE}
{QUOTE-> 212ETA - CSJ wasn't agreeing with you, he was telling you why you were WRONG. <-QUOTE}
lol, this is fun :)

[dNor]

Thanks to OP and The Hammer for showing me this test.

As to 212eta, I really wish I knew what the hell was going on. Maybe his complaints about AV-Comparatives should be in a different thread or something. Seems he doesn't like their methodology. ???

[212eta]

{QUOTE-> i dont know who you are, but you really do talk alot of shit. ::) <-QUOTE}Despite your tone, you got my point in your previous message.

[C.S.J]

{QUOTE->

Despite your tone, you got my point in your previous message. <-QUOTE}
seriously, i dont think i did.

i, like everyone else, aint really sure what you mean.

[212eta]

I mean that the way these tests are conducted delays, not to say
locks out, the induction of new products and/or new versions of the existing ones.
As tests require the exactly same products, it takes a lot of time to see something really different.
As am not an native-english speaker and with the speed of reply, I misunderstood your words.
If some of you want to make fun of it, no problem.
For the ones, who are not av-comparatives.org followers or who want more info about other results:
virusinfo.info
pcwelt.de
chip.de (the blog)

I learn not to shoot the others who have a different opinion...

Have a Good Night!!!

[212eta]

{QUOTE-> If you can't provide this information then you're just an idiot trying to cause trouble. <-QUOTE}At least, I didn't use that kind of language...
Does av-comparatives.org sponsor you?

[Bubba]

I'll first of all ask that We despense with the less than respectful responses and word usage. I'll also ask that We find our way back to the thread topic which happens to be the PcWelt test not about other AV tests. The personal references and other forums business is not our concern. Discuss the test not the individuals.

If the discussion of other AV tests is desired....do so by starting another thread Please.

Thanks,
Bubba

[Edit]
Off topic posts to this threads topic removed. I suggest the above request be re-read, in particular the part "If the discussion of other AV tests is desired....do so by starting another thread Please."

[apm]

this is new
http://blog.chip.de/0-security-blog/microsoft-verbessert-seinen-virenscanner-20070821/

[SystemJunkie]

Yes and it fits in what I thought, bit defender overruns avira.

[trjam]

yes, webwasher uses Avira with some cranked up add-ins.;)

[ronjor]

One post removed. Use the personal message feature of the forums for private messages.

Also read the Terms Of Service (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/TOS-Privacy.html) as to what may be posted here in the forums.

[Bubba]

more posts removed.

One more time.... "If the discussion of other AV tests is desired....do so by starting another thread Please.". This thread concerns the pcwelt test.

[Scoobs72]

{QUOTE-> At least, I didn't use that kind of language...
Does av-comparatives.org sponsor you? <-QUOTE}


@212ETA, I apologise for inferring that you are a complete idiot. No, I am not sponsored by av-comparatives.

[gerardwil]

Latest PCWelt results from the past 12 month's:

December 2007 edition, page 102

Gerard

[tec505]

Any link?

[IBK]

its in the printed version; its basically just a reprinted summary of some tests done between december 2006, the big one from March 2007 and a small rootkit test of if i remember right september 2007. i have it not in front of me right now, so someone needs to confirm what i said.

[tec505]

Thanks IBK

[gerardwil]

Tested on 23.05.2007: Backdoors, Trojans, Bots and Worms
Tested on 04.02.2007: Office Exploits
Tested on 16.12.2006: ITW Viruses
Tested on 16.10.2007: Active Rootkits

Highest overall score: 99.35
Lowest overall score: 61.44

That's all folks,

Gerard

[IBK]

New test released today: http://www.pcwelt.de/start/sicherheit/antivirus/news/129927/

[C.S.J]

Drweb soo low, I think its time they give Me some answers!

[midway40]

Wow, check out MS and Trend moving on up in the ranks.

[likuidkewl]

HA! how long before the NOD32 fanboys discredit this test from Marx.

[MalwareDie]

Sophos getting a high score = instant fail. Also, everybody knows ClamAV's score shouldn't even nearly be that high.

[C.S.J]

well drweb is down by about 9 percent, which is not a small margin, so somebody needs to start doing something, this only agrees what I've said on my latest thread for the doctor.

[risl]

I don't usually care about tests because I've never had any trouble with malware, but still a bit disappointed since 4.44 was supposed to have better detection(.origin&rootkits). Hopefully some from Dr.Web comments on this. :thumbd:

[tec505]

BD is flying high & high! (Only if they hadn't made that new useless GUI...)

F-PROT is going better than ever.

Good job, guys!

Mike

[Firecat]

{QUOTE-> Sophos getting a high score = instant fail. Also, everybody knows ClamAV's score shouldn't even nearly be that high. <-QUOTE}
No, Sopho's decent scores are due to "Mad Packer detection" (TM) :)

[C.S.J]

{QUOTE-> I don't usually care about tests because I've never had any trouble with malware, but still a bit disappointed since 4.44 was supposed to have better detection(.origin&rootkits). Hopefully some from Dr.Web comments on this. :thumbd: <-QUOTE}
I don't want to hear the excuses, only that they will fix this

And maybe give 'someone' a kick up the backside who surely is not doing their job, I've sent in enough samples myself, but won't do their job for them :)

The samples are there to be added, I'm very sure they have them, so why are they not adding them?

The technology is there, the origin tracing is very good, so I really dread to think what the score would have been without it.

This needs explaining, and fixing asap

[tec505]

What versions did they test?

i.e. Is f-Prot 6.0.8?
or are these SW freezed sometimes ago?

Mike

[IBK]

presumably the versions/updates are not older than from around the 10-15th November 2007 (guessing based on the german text).

[tec505]

{QUOTE-> presumably the versions/updates are not older than from around the 10-15th November 2007 (guessing based on the german text). <-QUOTE}

According to that F-PROT should be 6.0.8.0 (released on 29/10)

[TJP]

{QUOTE-> HA! how long before the NOD32 fanboys discredit this test from Marx. <-QUOTE}
I am an Eset customer but you won't find me discrediting this test. In fact, the results help to reconfirm what I've felt about Nod32 for some time now :(

On a more positive note, I think its great to see some of the other lesser known AV vendors getting good results

Cheers.

[trjam]

Just another "great" test. Kudos to F-Prot. :thumb:

[Macstorm]

As always, glad to see my baby at the very top :thumb:

webwasher? what is it? ::) ;D

[C.S.J]

Its avira plus paranoid heuristics, not for home use so I guess gdata is top :)

Outstanding & congrats

[Macstorm]

Yeah Chris, i know WW that's why my 'smilies' above :)

On the other hand, i agree with others about... MS! :o

[lucas1985]

IMO, the only surprises are DrWeb and McAfee. Also, I expected Fortinet to perform better, because it flags everything ::)
KAV, BD, Symantec and Antivir at the top, Avast, AVG and ESET at the middle of the pack, paranoid scanners (Ikarus, Sophos, Webwasher) performing OK, Trend, Microsoft, F-Prot, ClamAV and VBA32 improving, Panda and Norman so-so and eTrust ::) LOL

[xandros]

good job webwasher antivirus
any one have link to download and try webwasher antivirus ?

[bellgamin]

{QUOTE-> good job webwasher antivirus
any one have link to download and try webwasher antivirus ? <-QUOTE}It's a *Corporate Gateway* security app. AFAIK, they do not cater to individual home users. Website HERE (http://www.securecomputing.com/index.cfm?skey=1520). Shop HERE (http://www.thefirewallshop.com/detail.aspx?ID=189). Only $600/25users/year. Or (if you have a very large family), just $1110/50users/year. Rush right out & subscribe. ;D

[pykko]

{QUOTE-> It's a *Corporate Gateway* security app. AFAIK, they do not cater to individual home users. Website HERE (http://www.securecomputing.com/index.cfm?skey=1520). Shop HERE (http://www.thefirewallshop.com/detail.aspx?ID=189). Only $600/25users/year. Or (if you have a very large family), just $1110/50users/year. Rush right out & subscribe. ;D <-QUOTE}
Right. ;D
Anyway, they're using the Avira engine together with some very paranoid heuristics (that may lead to many FPs). You can try Avira instead.

[risl]

Perhaps they are doing something at dr.web, almost 7000 signatures added today when usually the number is around 200-250

[JerryM]

{QUOTE-> Perhaps they are doing something at dr.web, almost 7000 signatures added today when usually the number is around 200-250 <-QUOTE}

I bet they are doing "something." I wonder what?;D

Best,
Jerry

[risl]

probably added 6800 variants of eicar test file

[JerryM]

{QUOTE-> probably added 6800 variants of eicar test file <-QUOTE}

Thanks for that. I got a good laugh, and that is always good.
Jerry:thumb:

[pykko]

{QUOTE-> Perhaps they are doing something at dr.web, almost 7000 signatures added today when usually the number is around 200-250 <-QUOTE}
strange enough because Avira added about 6500 defs today also. They usually add a lot, but not more then 1500. It is definetely a special day today. ;D

[LowWaterMark]

Posts unrelated to the "new pcwelt test" have been removed.

As this has been one of the most heavily moderated threads in this forum section, it is now closed.