NOD32 Detection Performance

[Lewis]

I purchased and have been using NOD32 for a few months now. I like the fact that NOD32 is light on rescources and scans fast; however my main goal is 100% virus detection. I almost passed out when I read the test results at this site.

www.av-comparatives.org Select the Comparatives menu item then the Feb 2004 test.

Anyone care to comment?

As one fine member of this forum says "the truth is out there".

[mrtwolman]

{QUOTE-> quoting: Lewis link=board=39;threadid=26091;start=0#msg151467 date=1080540940]
I purchased and have been using NOD32 for a few months now. I like the fact that NOD32 is light on rescources and scans fast; however my main goal is 100% virus detection. <-QUOTE}

Then be warned. Your goal is impossible to reach using antivirus program. Back in early 80ties Dr. Cohen proved it is impossible to decide if some file is virus or not using automated system.............


{QUOTE-> quoting: Lewis link=board=39;threadid=26091;start=0#msg151467 date=1080540940]
I almost passed out when I read the test results at this site.
www.av-comparatives.org Select the Comparatives menu item then the Feb 2004 test. Anyone care to comment?
<-QUOTE}
Just calm down. The test does not reflect the real protection antivirus program offers in daily use (as most antivirus tests). I had a discussion both with author of the test and with ESET. I saw some files from the test set which were not viral at all. The test results for NOD32, just for your information were corrected due error in testing.
This test has been discussed on http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=22807;start=0

[Lewis]

Yes 100% is impossable, but just mean, why pick less than the best.

Thanks for your input mrtwolman

[Mack Jones]

Why pick less than the best ?
eh eh ;)
First of all, I don't think "best" is the correct word here.
Best in what ? in detection ?
Don't forget that detection is not the most important point, I will give you an example:
take McAfee, wonderful engine, very effective,but the major problem is that its update is not daily... Is McAfee the best ? in terms of detection, maybe one of the best yes, but what about an AV engine if the viral bases are too seldom up to date ?

Now take NOD 32, it's light (that counts), and updates are daily released, but it's doesn't detect 100% in tests we can see.
Aren't we protected ? I don't think so.
The fact is those tests are very theorical, that's lab tests.
Trust me, you will not be less protected with NOD 32, unless you try to infect yourself with some very uncommun virus you will not find on your mail box.
For my part, I leaved VirusScan 4.51 because it was unable to detect virus that NOD 32 discovered first (Trojan.Getfound was detected first by KAV/Eset and by NAI only after a submission :-\, same for Trojan.Downloader).

That I can conclude after years of use of both VS & NOD 32, is if you have an attentive behavior (the safe hex !) you will profit from the exclusive advantages of NOD 32: incredible speed, near-dealy updates and that impressive detection of ITW virus who did that makes its glory.

But one thing is clear, if you want to test antivirus with some huge collections you can find on the web, it is certain that the couple KAV/FSAV is ahead, but it's definitely not the real world of daily use, the ITW world !

Regards,
Nick

[nameless]

To put it more bluntly, if you download much from P2P and/or Usenet, you had better not rely only on NOD32, but also on KAV.

[sir_carew]

No, I'm not agree with nameless.
KAV detect more P2P malware than NOD, but NOD detect ***many*** unknown malware using Advanced Heuristic even malware that isn't covered by KAV.