Self Protection Test - Anti-Malware.ru

[C.S.J]

New test posted today,

Enjoy (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://www.anti-malware.ru/self_protection_2009) :)

in-depth analysis here (http://64.233.183.100/translate_c?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://www.anti-malware.ru/files/self-protection2_results.xls&usg=ALkJrhhojh36E7mkpBLwiCJKDH-Iv_qRsg)

[emperordarius]

:o

That's why you posted this so happily ;D
Dr.Web is an absolute winner

[ASpace]

Do you trust anything made by Sergey Ilyin ?

[C.S.J]

-{ Quote: ":o

That's why you posted this so happily ;D
Dr.Web is an absolute winner" }-
lol, just simply posted it is all.

[format_c]

OMG!

-{ Quote: "
Do you trust anything made by Sergey Ilyin ?
" }-

you're wrong. his name is Ilya Shabanov. we don't trust him at all.

[PiCo]

Well if the result is true it is outstanding, cause they just issued the self-protection module.

And I had zero issues with it, I have disabled/re-enabled it hundreds times.

[Bob D]

Is this test using current releases?
I see VBA32 v3.12.8.1 which is 6 months old.
Current release is 3.12.8.10.
Maybe just a typo?

[Hybride_F1]

-{ Quote: "
you're wrong. his name is Ilya Shabanov. we don't trust him at all." }-

...and why?

Honestly i am using Outpost Security Suite and Dr. Web and all i can tell that both are great defending themselfes. The defence of Dr. Web is even so good (perhaps too good) that i have problems uninstalling it.

I think you should try first and write after.

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "...and why?

Honestly i am using Outpost Security Suite and Dr. Web and all i can tell that both are great defending themselfes. The defence of Dr. Web is even so good (perhaps too good) that i have problems uninstalling it.

I think you should try first and write after." }-

umm i had this nightmare with KAV 7 and im not sure it was that, in the end i could nto get it off my system any way i tried, reformat was only solution, KAV 7 was soooo deeply rooted in that it was worse than a virus... so being hard to uninstall isnt always a good sign/good thing and i know KAV 7 self-protection wasn't that amazing so ye...

[risl]

-{ Quote: "The defence of Dr. Web is even so good (perhaps too good) that i have problems uninstalling it." }-

Did you use some custom uninstaller/cleaner program or Dr.Web's own uninstaller?

[Fuzzfas]

Congratulations to Dr. Web! Finally a test where Avira hits the bottom! Unbelievable!

Great work for all russian antiviruses!


Dr. Web - The "Die Hard" antivirus! :argh:

You can fool the Doctor, but you can't kill him!

[TechOutsider]

Not surprised Norton got "Gold"; CCLeaner deleted its startup entry for the fourth time. And I only ran the file cleaning component, not even the registry cleaning component. B4 I thought it was the registry component.

[Zimzi]

Is there a free version of Dr.Web with real time protection like Avira or Avast?

[PiCo]

-{ Quote: "Is there a free version of Dr.Web with real time protection like Avira or Avast?" }-No there isn't!

[C.S.J]

-{ Quote: "No there isn't!" }-
he could always use the demo, free for 30 days :)

then purchase if he likes ;D

[RejZoR]

-{ Quote: "Is this test using current releases?
I see VBA32 v3.12.8.1 which is 6 months old.
Current release is 3.12.8.10.
Maybe just a typo?" }-

I doubt it was just a typo. Look at avast! version. It's also very old... current one is 4.8.1296...

[C.S.J]

-{ Quote: "I doubt it was just a typo. Look at avast! version. It's also very old... current one is 4.8.1296..." }-
have they changed anything with their self protection since? if not, it doesnt matter.

the test obviously wasn't done on the 16th, just reported.
maybe the tested versions are of versions the vendors wanted.

who knows, im sure all is correct for the versions tested, i highly doubt they would make a mistake such as this.

[krokodil_bb]

-{ Quote: "he could always use the demo, free for 30 days :)

then purchase if he likes ;D" }-
or register as beta-tester and use it free forever

[krokodil_bb]

Dr.Web is an winner in selfprotection but is that selfprotection always compatible with other sw and without bsod?

[C.S.J]

-{ Quote: "Dr.Web is an winner in selfprotection but is that selfprotection always compatible with other sw and without bsod?" }-
ive had no problems with it ;)

...so far (never say never)

[RejZoR]

-{ Quote: "have they changed anything with their self protection since? if not, it doesnt matter.

the test obviously wasn't done on the 16th, just reported.
maybe the tested versions are of versions the vendors wanted.

who knows, im sure all is correct for the versions tested, i highly doubt they would make a mistake such as this." }-

Well, we can't know now do we? But if you test latest versions like DrWeb 5 it would make sense to use latest versions of others as well.
There is no rule that every aspect of program has to be documented in changelog. Especially not self-protection.

[format_c]

-{ Quote: "maybe the tested versions are of versions the vendors wanted.
" }-

no, we dont want to have any relations with anti-malware.ru nor other KasperskyLab projects.

[Baz_kasp]

Kaspersky probably would have done better with the new .506 version which was released mainly to tighten up the self defense.

[fistico]

-Why a Russian Testing site has almost -Always-
Russian AntiMalware products in the -First- places of its Tests?

-It is because it mostly uses Malware coming from Russia
and therefore, Russian AntiMalware products are -Already-
Updated/Immunized against these Threats?

It reminds me of THIS (http://antivirus.ru/AntiVirPS.html) site
where Both Dr.Web and Kaspersky
are -ALWAYS- better than anyone...

I guess this is just a Coincidence...;D

[Baz_kasp]

-{ Quote: "-Why a Russian Testing site has almost -Always-
Russian AntiMalware products in the -First- places of its Tests?

-It is because it mostly uses Malware coming from Russia
and therefore, Russian AntiMalware products are -Already-
Updated/Immunized against these Threats?

It reminds me of THIS (http://antivirus.ru/AntiVirPS.html) site
where Both Dr.Web and Kaspersky
are -ALWAYS- better than anyone...

I guess this is just a Coincidence...;D" }-


Um...because they are actually good at what they are meant to be doing?

You cant immunise for a self defense test...you must already have the infrastructure in place to deal with attacks on your program, it's not like adding a signature.

If you look here you will see that other "non Russian" av's have also been recipients of awards on many occasions

http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fanti-malware.ru%2Ftests_history&sl=ru&tl=en&history_state0=

[Bob D]

-{ Quote: "-Why a Russian Testing site has almost -Always- Russian AntiMalware products in the -First- places of its Tests?" }-
September 2007: Dr Web failed.
January 2008: Sole "Gold Awards" were to Avira, Bitdefender.

[format_c]

-{ Quote: "It reminds me of THIS (http://antivirus.ru/AntiVirPS.html) site
" }-

lol! forget it now and for ever. that's far less than nothing :P

[TechOutsider]

Does the Internet Security Suite test apply to their AntiVirus suite counterparts?

Eg. does NIS09's results apply to NAV09?

[dawgg]

-{ Quote: "Does the Internet Security Suite test apply to their AntiVirus suite counterparts?
Eg. does NIS09's results apply to NAV09?" }-
Seeing as its a direct attack and nothing to do with the internet, I guess it will also apply to the AV equivilants because they are both built around the same core.

[The Hammer]

-{ Quote: "lol, just simply posted it is all." }-"The test must be flawed". Wait isn't that normally your line. LOL.;)

[aigle]

I wish they could test behav blockers like TF, Mamutu, PRSC etc.
Have they any one here on the forums?

[C.S.J]

-{ Quote: ""The test must be flawed". Wait isn't that normally your line. LOL.;)" }-
the test probably is flawed.

[BlueZannetti]

-{ Quote: "the test probably is flawed." }-To varying degrees every test out there is flawed in that they provide imperfect assessments of the trait that they supposedly quantify. In some cases that imperfection rises to the level of a structural defect. In other cases both the reader and the tester overreach with respect to the scope over which the results obtained truly apply.

While it's generally appreciated that these tests are snapshots in time, all too frequently it's not appreciated that these are local snapshots in time at best, not global measures of performance.

Blue

[Arup]

LOL! and here I thought tests don't matter to someone. Finally I can use Avira in peace.

[C.S.J]

Tests don't bother or interest me, don't shoot the messenger.

Great credit must be given to drweb who dismiss tests that they score highly in, a slap in the face I'm sure to those fanboys who spread such lies for drwebs reasons to pull out of av-comparatives.

Some avs do not need a test result to gain customers, or to be recognised for fantastic protection and technologys.

[trjam]

I have no problem giving the thumbs up to Dr Web in this test.:thumb: It kills me that sometimes we can not accept the common fact, that products do get better.

[TechOutsider]

-{ Quote: "I have no problem giving the thumbs up to Dr Web in this test.:thumb: It kills me that sometimes we can not accept the common fact, that products do get better." }-

Dr. Web was always a reliable product to begin with and I love it's link scanner.

[Arup]

Some AVs don't need to win any tests to prove themselves and Avira is one of them, tests or not, its top notch, all the FUD spread by fanoboyz of other AVs ( ya know who you are ) notwithstanding.

[steve1955]

-{ Quote: "Tests don't bother or interest me, don't shoot the messenger.

Great credit must be given to drweb who dismiss tests that they score highly in, a slap in the face I'm sure to those fanboys who spread such lies for drwebs reasons to pull out of av-comparatives.

Some avs do not need a test result to gain customers, or to be recognised for fantastic protection and technologys." }-

Is this the first test result you haven't had to dig into your bag of excuses to explain why either the test is flawed or DWeb hasn't done too well in?

[C.S.J]

I don't need to dig anywhere, the truth is there to see....

Sadly, some people do not want to see it.

[Arup]

I see the light at the end of the tunnel...........its an Epiphany with Avira written all over. ;)

[Bunkhouse Buck]

-{ Quote: "I see the light at the end of the tunnel...........its an Epiphany with Avira written all over. ;)" }-

And there are tests to back it up unlike some AV vendors that have piss-poor results in AV-Comparatives and withdraw from testing. But of course you stay in tests that have a good outcome.

[Arup]

-{ Quote: "And there are tests to back it up unlike some AV vendors that have piss-poor results in AV-Comparatives and withdraw from testing. But of course you stay in tests that have a good outcome." }-


But those tests are flawed..............isn't it ;D

[steve1955]

-{ Quote: "And there are tests to back it up unlike some AV vendors that have piss-poor results in AV-Comparatives and withdraw from testing. But of course you stay in tests that have a good outcome." }-
Who do you mean?(lol)

[steve1955]

-{ Quote: "I don't need to dig anywhere, the truth is there to see....

Sadly, some people do not want to see it." }-
sounds like a quote from the X files!!:-that was fiction as well!

[C.S.J]

you really wont believe the truth, even if it kicks you in the butt.


simple, avira read these forums...... ask them, ask them if my words are false or lies. :)

ask them if my posts over the many many months hold no truth and are just 'fiction'

maybe they wont admit their AV is a piece of crap, or their 'protection' is soooo falsely advertised & overrated, but maybe you will find some answers that you have been trying really hard NOT to find.

[C.S.J]

-{ Quote: "And there are tests to back it up unlike some AV vendors that have piss-poor results in AV-Comparatives and withdraw from testing. But of course you stay in tests that have a good outcome." }-

you may say such comments as a 'come back' towards either myself or drweb, its a shame you dont put as much effort into finding out all this for yourself, instead of looking at your little detection results, and going day-by-day using your 'fantastic' anti-virus, of course it does not bother me what you or anybody else uses, but as this is a forum, people should know and at the least, learn about what their 'protection' actually does for them, people should know why their antivirus is 99% detection, people should know it all, a forum with customers, it is a shame alot of them DONT want to know, they want to hold their head up high, 99% detection, awesome!! ::)

drweb dismiss tests they score well in, but maybe you forget the other companys such as trend, fprot and panda.

you dont remember the harsh words by both fprot and drweb members towards IBK in this very forum, you really thought they were lies? ::)

Av-Comparatives - ::)

ie. Avira miss 10,000 samples, IBK sends them, Avira add them all in 5 minutes, 100% detection, fantastic.

this could be 10,000 more added FP's, this does not show you the level of 'protection' Avira offer?

not only is this very bad protection, it also leads IBK to believe his samples were valid to be included in the tests

if Avira really didnt have Av-Comparatives to play buddy with in their little marketing game, they wouldnt have nothing.

packer detection that detects everything, hmm.... you call this protection?

without Av-Comparatives, Avira would still be quite unknown to this forum as it was before all this, they would have no technology unique to their AV, staff either too lazy to think,create or even study it, and of course, there are many many other reasons, check my 'catalogue' of comments on it ;)

oh welll, At least you all have a nice pretty umbrella to stare at and a little donation given too, at least you all did 'your part'

Yippee. ::)

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "any clue why i always have a reply to these types of replies, the truth will never ever lose to pure lies, hearsay and pure marketing which lures fools towards their software.

drweb dismiss tests they score well in, but maybe you forget the other companys such as trend, fprot and panda.

you dont remember the harsh words by both fprot and drweb members towards IBK in this very forum, you really thought they were lies? ::)

Av-Comparatives - ::)

ie. Avira miss 10,000 samples, IBK sends them, Avira add them all in 5 minutes, 100% detection, fantastic.

this could be 10,000 more added FP's, this does not show you the level of 'protection' Avira offer?

not only is this very bad protection, it also leads IBK to believe his samples were valid to be included in the tests

if Avira really didnt have Av-Comparatives to play buddy with in their little marketing game, they wouldnt have nothing.

packer detection that detects everything, hmm.... you call this protection?

without Av-Comparatives, Avira would still be quite unknown to this forum as it was before all this, they would have no technology unique to their AV, staff either too lazy to think,create or even study it, and of course, there are many many other reasons, check my 'catalogue' of comments on it ;)

oh welll, At least you all have a nice pretty umbrella to stare at and a little donation given too, at least you all did 'your part'

Yippee. ::)" }-

ok, insulting each person's AV's are a little uncalled for, i dont think all the people here that use Avira are complete idiots and know nothing, they have a great product that DOES do its job well, i know considering ive been using for quite a while myself and im not infected and have rarely got FP's. im sure Dr.Web is good to, never tried it, but i think we should keep on topic instead of insulting each other's AV's here.

[Hybride_F1]

I think this shouldn't turn out in an A vs B thread.

All AVs have strengths and weaknesses. In the case of Dr.Web to Avira they stand in the direct opposit, medium detection against very good detection and very good self defense against medium self defense, thats all. The vendors know their weak and strong points. Dr.Web is improving the detection as Avira is improving the self-defense. That should be a great news for all user.

Hybride

edit: You are absolutly right firzen771 ( u are simply too fast for my poor english :) )

[C.S.J]

so, back to the test.

even in internal testing, drweb comes out tops in self-protection, and everyone knows about drwebs removal, so ...bleah! ;D

AM's results dont match with current internal tests, and the kaspersky link im sure bothers drweb, im sure these are the reasons (probably just some of, i dont know) for dismissing this test.

but the Nod32 (4) guys should be smiling too, maybe not as wide as Drweb, but who can... ;) *lol*

[C.S.J]

-{ Quote: "ok, insulting each person's AV's are a little uncalled for, i dont think all the people here that use Avira are complete idiots and know nothing, they have a great product that DOES do its job well, i know considering ive been using for quite a while myself and im not infected and have rarely got FP's. im sure Dr.Web is good to, never tried it, but i think we should keep on topic instead of insulting each other's AV's here." }-
I dont think its uncalled for, this is a forum, their methods are uncalled for.

its not a matter of insulting each persons AV, its a matter of Aviras methods, you agree with them, or like many you also think my posts are pure lies?

the problem is their misleading information, mainly their packer detections, and the very very misleading Av-Comparatives tests which Avira treat very wrongly (missed samples etc).

[C.S.J]

-{ Quote: "I think this shouldn't turn out in an A vs B thread.

All AVs have strengths and weaknesses. In the case of Dr.Web to Avira they stand in the direct opposit, medium detection against very good detection and very good self defense against medium self defense, thats all. The vendors know their weak and strong points. Dr.Web is improving the detection as Avira is improving the self-defense. That should be a great news for all user.

Hybride

edit: You are absolutly right firzen771 ( u are simply too fast for my poor english :) )" }-
You are completely correct, all av's and pros and cons.

but Aviras pro is their detection (it is, i dont argue it), and it really is a CON, but people do not see this (many do ;) , but ... obviously, on 'this forum'.... many ALSO dont)

all i ask, is for some of these who dont, just to ask a few questions once in a while, instead of spreading their constant BS about their detection.

[IBK]

according to what i was told from some few chinese vendors, it seems that the dr.web products are heavily promoted in china by using the anti-malware.ru test results..
would be nice if some chinese user could show some evidence about this (like a foto or scan of magazine, dunno), since i have not received one yet.

[ronjor]

Thread closed per Policy. (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=180128)