Languy99 tests, how reliable ?

[CloneRanger]

He's just done a test with an illegal :D copy of Prevx -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zx7vlH1FJ2A- against 15 possible malware www's he had listed. Some were dead so not all got tested.

221318

Prevx detected 8 and he clicked remove, but instead of waiting for it to do it's thing, straightaway he also clicks RUN again on the malware everytime :o

Also he ignores Prevx requests to do a scan after every infection ??? thereby preventing any possible extra detection and cleanup :(

Not only all that, but as in every other test of his i've seen, he keeps on running one malware after another, and then at some point complains his comp is slowing down ;D

Furthermore after whatever AV he tests, he then uses other apps like MBAM/SAS etc to try and find what the AV missed. Any malware still found then appears to show these apps in a good light, and the AV in a poor one. Sure they found what they found, and kudos for doing so.

But hang on a minute, what if he didn't allow the test AV to delete what it finds, until after he runs MBAM/SAS etc and then see if they detect the stuff the test AV did ? The way he tests is always flawed in favour of the after apps, as well as multiple running of malware, and clicking run whilst also clicking Remove etc.

If he did the tests sequentially and independently one malware at a time, in the way i've described, that would be a LOT fairer and better don't you think ?

[Matthijs5nl]

Don't worry, Prevx only let 1 link through (that was quite bad though: even Windows Defender detected it ;D). The rest were all correctly blocked and removed by Prevx, that 8 results in the Prevx user interface are just the leftovers which it deleted after that scan after the pc reboot (after this removal he rebooted again and started running the on-demand scanners).
About his methodoly: ofcourse such a test means nothing. But this ain't in the favour of the on-demand scanners in my opinion. Prevx got his chance to do the job and did that in a really good way (like I said previously only 1 thing slipped through). The fact he presses Run after Remove is not really important, since Prevx already deleted the problem, so clicking Run leads to a non-existing file (and thus gives a Windows warning).

The one file slipped through was one rogue located in the Windows Defender/Local Copy directory: it got detected by Windows Defender, Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware and Hitman Pro. So buy the Prevx + Hitman Pro bundle and you got a great deal ;D.

[pabrate]

Languy99 does great reviews, he did Prevx like every other one.
I wonder if Prevx blocked everything would your comment be positive then :)
There is no 100% protection for any AV , multilayer is the key.

-{ Quote: "Also he ignores Prevx requests to do a scan after every infection thereby preventing any possible extra detection and cleanup " }-

btw what is the diff. running full scan after every detection and running it once later ?
I really don't understand that.

[funkydude]

The only persons reviews I've ever liked were Mrizos. He isn't affiliated with anyone and gives an unbiased opinion. Everyone else is just a wannabe.

[trjam]

-{ Quote: "The only persons reviews I've ever liked were Mrizos. He isn't affiliated with anyone and gives an unbiased opinion. Everyone else is just a wannabe." }-

I would agree with that.

[clocks]

The review is what it is. Being on youtube, you can watch and make your own judgments.

In this case, I didn't feel Prevx did that bad. He says that it's zero day protection sucks, but really it caught almost every link. The instances Malwarebytes found where likely from one or two threats, not necessarily 5-6 things getting through. Compared against how most AV fair against a test of this type, that is pretty good. Especially since he tested it against a couple rogues, which are notoriously hard to identify.

He does make a great point though that Prevxs business model sucks, and they should give a proper 30 day trial, without having to ask a moderator or jump through hoops. They are the only vendor I can think of that operates like that.

[dw426]

My first question is how'd he manage to get an illegal copy of Prevx? That things' license restrictions are so tight it comes close to paying customers being treated like THEY have illegal copies. On-topic though, this "Languy" is about as reliable, IMHO, as Windows ME (for you folks that had the pleasure to miss out on that, it was bad). I've noticed he has a thing for being very specific about the type of malware he chooses for the test, and then, when he picks them, maybe 4 out of 8 are actually still live links. And yeah, he makes sure to run a MBAM scan every chance he gets.

[clocks]

-{ Quote: "The only persons reviews I've ever liked were Mrizos. He isn't affiliated with anyone and gives an unbiased opinion. Everyone else is just a wannabe." }-


Matts videos were nice, but I think the last one he did was over a month ago and it was of a fire in his backyard. He did a bunch of videos in the past, that provided him the following to be able to launch his blog/website. After launching that, he pretty much stopped doing the videos. I think he is more of a business man that a hobbyist, not that their is anything wrong with that.

[Peter2150]

Why would I ever trust anything done by someone using "stolen" software. That is foolish.

Pete

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "Why would I ever trust anything done by someone using "stolen" software. That is foolish.

Pete" }-

Point taken, for all he knew the software itself was infected. LanGuy: "Prevx says I'm infected, let's test its ability!". A couple of minutes later, LanGuy: "Hmm, not good folks, Prevx isn't cleaning this. Let's go to MBAM!" A couple of minutes and a reboot later, LanGuy: "Alright! Good old MBAM came through again! Let's test Prevx on something....hey, why isn't Prevx working anymore?"

Btw, even with people who actually liked his reviews, didn't his credibility just fall over dead by using a hacked copy of security software?

[clocks]

-{ Quote: "Point taken, for all he knew the software itself was infected. Matt: "Prevx says I'm infected, let's test its ability!". A couple of minutes later, Matt: "Hmm, not good folks, Prevx isn't cleaning this. Let's go to MBAM!" A couple of minutes and a reboot later, Matt: "Alright! Good old MBAM came through again! Let's test Prevx on something....hey, why isn't Prevx working anymore?"

Btw, even with people who actually liked his reviews, didn't his credibility just fall over dead by using a hacked copy of security software?" }-


Matt Rizos is not Languy99. Also, I don't believe Languy used a "hacked" version of Prevx. Rather I suspect one of his followers loaned their license key to him for his trial/test.

[pabrate]

-{ Quote: "Why would I ever trust anything done by someone using "stolen" software. That is foolish.

Pete" }-

What do you mean by "stolen" ?
How do you know that ?
He said that his friend gave him license to test the product.
As far as I know, there is no way you can clean the malware without proper and valid license key.
Protection features can be 'bypassed' but I don't think 'Cleaning' can.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "Matt Rizos is not Languy99. Also, I don't believe Languy used a "hacked" version of Prevx. Rather I suspect one of his followers loaned their license key to him for his trial/test." }-

Sorry, the post above mine confused me, I'll edit it to make sure accusations go to the right place. Also, loaning a key I doubt would work unless that key had never been used. It's a PITA just to get Prevx to work again on a system it had previously been installed on, let alone an entirely different system.

[burebista]

-{ Quote: "Why would I ever trust anything done by someone using "stolen" software. That is foolish." }-
He's honest and said that he have a license from a friend. If he didn't say anything about license I guess you trust him, no? ::)

I saw a horrible slowdown (dunno if it's because PrevX), I saw a paid software without trial and I saw a software which misses 0 day malware in default config.
For me is enough to never look at PrevX when you can have some free alternatives.

And to answer at thread title, for me languy is reliable.

[SweX]

-{ Quote: "Matt Rizos is not Languy99." }-
:thumb:

[dw426]

-{ Quote: ":thumb:" }-

Yep, my post is fixed now though :)

[SweX]

Good Good:thumb:

[Saraceno]

If you read many of his youtube comments to other viewers, you'll see he isn't taking himself too seriously, or wanting to be the epitome of testing.

I watch his videos to see how a program is setup, see what type of alerts a program gives, see if it has behaviour monitoring, how quickly the alert appears, does the system freeze after an alert, is the webpage blocked first, is the program easy to use, and so on and so on.

Lot to learn from his reviews, but if you focus on virus removal, that isn't the point of his review for me anyway, especially with such a small sample.

Considering he's pumping out the reviews, as fast as people on wilders say, 'heard of AV XYZ?', personally, he's saving me a lot of installs and uninstalls, and others as well. I just watch his review, and think, 'nah, ugly, slow program, no thanks', or 'will install that on my next system'.

Agree he should wait between running each file, and the majority of users wouldn't open five files in a row, but if he's consistent, and does the same for all programs, than he is showing a degree of consistency....so to speak.

Overall, the good outweighs the bad. :)

Edit - as dw426 mentioned, he is a big fan of MBAM, but that's common nowadays as MBAM is what many forums are sticking to as the go-to tool. Here we use a variety of programs, but on other forums, MBAM is it. To his credit, he seems to be giving SAS and particularly, Hitman Pro a go too. Noticed he even uses CureIt, a-squared and others or secondary scans. Could his reviews be better? Sure, always room for improvement. Given the time frame? Not sure, probably not.

[cheater87]

Languy is one of my favorite testers on youtube hes very trustworthy. He just got a key to use thats all he didn't get a crack.

[Ibrad]

From what I read on another forum he is suspected of hand picking malware samples.

Also if I remember correctly Languy was the one who tested Panda Cloud once, it did good so he blamed bad samples and redid the test?

[Saraceno]

Hand pick samples or not, even if you hand picked samples to ensure Norton got 2/10, would mean nothing to me if Kingsoft got 10/10.

10 samples should have no bearing on the justification for any security product. If it does mean a lot to the viewer, then they'll be changing security programs as often as a new video appears.

[datarishik]

I think Languy99 is one of the best standalone testers of security software on Youtube. While mrizos is equally good but his videos are too long and tend to get boring after a while.

[CogitoTesting]

The guys is extremely bias I've been reading one interesting thread at Comdo forums where he stated that the new PCLS Labs test is fishy and of course he did not provide any proof to the effect. Any test that does not portray Comodo in a good light is suspect or fishy according to him and the bashing of the product or the test will commence.

Somehow I feel sorry for the guy the reason I say this has to do with the fact he is a mod at Comodo forums and he himself must toe the line or he will get booted out. Any user or mod who does not fanatically support Comodo will be banned for ever. So in fairness what else can I expect him to do. ;D

Thanks.

[clocks]

He put himself in a bad position when he accepted an offer to become a mod at Comodo.

[SweX]

-{ Quote: "I think Languy99 is one of the best standalone testers of security software on Youtube. While mrizos is equally good but his videos are too long and tend to get boring after a while." }-

Wrong wrong... Languy99 rushes through his tests wich is irritating.
And IMO he did become a YT partner for nothing since he still rushes through the tests.
While Matt (mrizos) reads every popup and explains what's going on, and waits for the software to react before he moves on.

And Yes I do prefer the latter.

[mhl6493]

-{ Quote: "Wrong wrong... Languy99 rushes through his tests wich is irritating.
And IMO he did become a YT partner for nothing since he still rushes through the tests.
While Matt (mrizos) reads every popup and explains what's going on, and waits for the software to react before he moves on.

And Yes I do prefer the latter." }-

As do I! Slow down. What's the rush? Just wish Matt had time to produce more videos...

[SweX]

-{ Quote: "Just wish Matt had time to produce more videos..." }-

Yes Indeed!:thumb:

[Rampastein]

I have watched two of his videos in the past, declared them a waste of time and haven't watched any after those.

While he tests zero-day protection, he doesn't really seem to care about how easy-to-use the products are (for example, if there are pop-ups, he answers everything correctly while a normal user wouldn't) and if there would be settings to alter for advanced users. He also doesn't explain anything about the pop-ups and doesn't give the products a chance to remove the malware themselves before running all the on-demand scanners.
-{ Quote: "The guys is extremely bias I've been reading one interesting thread at Comdo forums where he stated that the new PCLS Labs test is fishy and of course he did not provide any proof to the effect. Any test that does not portray Comodo in a good light is suspect or fishy according to him and the bashing of the product or the test will commence." }-
Agreed.

[Peter2150]

-{ Quote: "Languy is one of my favorite testers on youtube hes very trustworthy. He just got a key to use thats all he didn't get a crack." }-

In that case the OP totally misspoke.

[PhantomPhenix]

sigh...

Can we please stay on topic here? Comments about Languys affiliation with Comodo should be left alone for another thread/topic.

[clocks]

-{ Quote: "sigh...

Can we please stay on topic here? Comments about Languys affiliation with Comodo should be left alone for another thread/topic." }-


Well, in fairness, I think his relationship with Comodo falls into this discussion. It can impact if people think he is unbiased.

[Triple Helix]

I don't know why this thread is aloud to continue as it is about an individual and not about software IMHO.

TH

[clocks]

-{ Quote: "I don't know why this thread is aloud to continue as it is about an individual and not about software IMHO.

TH" }-


Good point. It should probably be youtube videos in general.

Personally I enjoy watching the videos, and think they do have some merit.

[icr]

I guess languy is fast coz he has to finish the the review in about 10 min and he doesnt make the Part 2 review of a given software unless necessary. With this context I do agree he is somewhat unreliable with certain genre of software, like he gave a review regarding malware defender and his review sucked bigtime:thumbd:

[jmc777]

Looks like Prevx was killed by malware at one point, as you can see the Prevx icon reappear in the system tray at 4:18. At 4:48 you can see him check the system tray and the red Prevx icon from the old 'killed' process disappears.

[trjam]

-{ Quote: "I don't know why this thread is aloud to continue as it is about an individual and not about software IMHO.

TH" }-
Maybe because the OP made it about a certain film maker and his art.

[LODBROK]

languy99 couldn't test a light bulb.

[CogitoTesting]

Wait a minute

I think we give this guy more importance than he deserves by discussing him. This advice should go for me as well: Guys let us discuss something important, something worthwhile. For example did you know Online-Armor has a x64 version of its firewall? Let's talk about that or something else on other threads. Please let this thread die in peace. Enough already.

Thanks.

[Noob]

I've watched a few videos of these guys in the past :P
It gets pretty boring fast (I mean every video including languy99, mrizos etc.) :)

[firzen771]

the only value his "tests" have is to show u what the program looks like, beyond that its just a waste of time. idk why he continues to make such terrible "tests", then again the majority of the people watching him on youtube do nothing but praise him and whatever he seems to say so i guess hes got an audience (no matter how blind they are)...

and his ability to take constructive criticism on how to improve is non-existent, he simply replies saying he knows what hes doing then goes ahead and repeats the same mistakes, just a waste of time.

[jmonge]

i think we should also consider the time he puts into his videos and all the work and trouble some times with slow down when testing so we should consider his valuable time of testing;) doin a video in youtube is not easy as you think it takes time and work;D so i say thanks to languy and matt for working hard on the videos

[AvinashR]

See his latest video on Online Armor ++ ... Why the heck he allowed last malware to run safer? Why he didn't blocked it?

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "See his latest video on Online Armor ++ ... Why the heck he allowed last malware to run safer? Why he didn't blocked it?" }-

Because he's an idiot? Lol.


@Jmonge: Um, with all due respect, why? Why should he be thanked or praised for spending, what you deem, a lot of time making videos of tests that can't even be taken seriously? I'm not attempting to be mean here, I just find it hard to thank someone who, to be honest, doesn't seem to know a whole lot about what he is doing, for putting up flawed test after test. At best, he's not being taken seriously. At worst, he's giving people who watch the wrong impression of these security apps.

[datarishik]

-{ Quote: "i think we should also consider the time he puts into his videos and all the work and trouble some times with slow down when testing so we should consider his valuable time of testing;) doin a video in youtube is not easy as you think it takes time and work;D so i say thanks to languy and matt for working hard on the videos" }-
Exactly. It takes a lot of time and effort to make those videos and so people like Languy99 and mrizos (Matt) need to be appreciated for the work they have done. But I would say that this thread is pointless because I see only bashing here instead of some constructive criticism. Languy99 has even tested some DNS services against malware samples. So that speaks a lot.

[begemot64]

This thread is pointless, but only because Languy/Mrizos/anyone else's videos are nearly entirely pointless (and worse, seriously misleading) from a testing point of view.

Throwing 10 links from MDL and then checking with MBAM/Hitman Pro to validate whether a security product is "good" or not is abysmally inadequate methodologically.

The product that let through the most samples in a test may actually be the best product. The product that blocked all 10 links may be the worst product. A sample size of 10 is just hilarious, as is the level of techical knowledge displayed by these testers. And control testing with something like MBAM? No comment.

I'm sure they all have good intentions for making these videos, but unfortunately, they provide only extremely limited, anecdotal evidence. What's worse, naive people who don't know better look at these reviews, think "this guy sounds reasonable, which product did well in his tests? I'll pick that one". This is stupidity (or more often than not, ignorance).

It's a real shame that people waste time making these videos, and others waste time watching them. Several people here have commented that "they have put in a lot of hard work and time" - this really should have been spent elsewhere.

The only merit in any of them is that you get to see program interfaces; however, there are plenty of better videos for that purpose.

[Matthijs5nl]

-{ Quote: "See his latest video on Online Armor ++ ... Why the heck he allowed last malware to run safer? Why he didn't blocked it?" }-
Because it is impossible to test an HIPS? It is impossible to say out of a strange warning whether something is malware or not, so for example a newbie may think that the second link he tried was genuine program and just click allow without saferun.

The fact is it is impossible to test out a HIPS program, all of them.

[DOSawaits]

Whatever the "testers" do, all they rely on for knowing their system is clean, is the task manager, they even don't have the "Show processes from all users" checked, and they even don't have the notification area to automatically show all icons by default. They simply enjoy running a VM and testing some stuff out, but you shouldn't take them too serious because they have 0.0 knowledge about good anti-malware testing.

[NAMOR]

My problem with these testers is that they do not always verify that the .exe they run from the MDL is in fact malware. They rely on scanners to determine their findings and the fact that the exe is listed on the MDL. See my previous post below. And the tester from the video is not the only one on youtube that I have seen do this.


http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1591779&postcount=24

[AvinashR]

-{ Quote: "Because it is impossible to test an HIPS? It is impossible to say out of a strange warning whether something is malware or not, so for example a newbie may think that the second link he tried was genuine program and just click allow without saferun.

The fact is it is impossible to test out a HIPS program, all of them." }-

Oh i see .... So i guess you must have saw him allowing malware to run outside the Comodo Sandbox... Have you ever saw that? I guess you haven't ... No need to mention the conspiracy behind that..

No doubt is he's doing a good job, but hey he's also misleading people who are watching him ... Now Question arises, How? That's what you better know than me...

[AvinashR]

-{ Quote: "My problem with these testers is that they do not always verify that the .exe they run from the MDL is in fact malware. They rely on scanners to determine their findings and the fact that the exe is listed on the MDL. See my previous post below. And the tester from the video is not the only one on youtube that I have seen do this.


http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1591779&postcount=24" }-

Agree with Namor ... All these samples are not Zero Day malwares ... If they were Zero Day, then i guess they won't be listed on MDL ..

[Ibrad]

Also almost everyone knows about MDL, what testers need to do it get their samples from the lesser or known malware URL collection sites. The video watchers also need to verify malware some how.

Say I were the head researcher for a malware lab, I could hourly go to MDL and blacklist each of the sites causing everytime someone youtube tests my product I could get a great blocking score. Now then again some of those sites may have been FP's so if I fix one then the tester goes to it and downloads it I get a fail for the URL. Now I am sure this was discussed somewhere before but I figure I would bring it back up into this.

Now I am not bashing YouTube tests, I use them to check the simplicity from a app but you can not put all your trust into these test.

[Kernelwars]

-{ Quote: "Also almost everyone knows about MDL, what testers need to do it get their samples from the lesser or known malware URL collection sites. The video watchers also need to verify malware some how.

Say I were the head researcher for a malware lab, I could hourly go to MDL and blacklist each of the sites causing everytime someone youtube tests my product I could get a great blocking score. Now then again some of those sites may have been FP's so if I fix one then the tester goes to it and downloads it I get a fail for the URL. Now I am sure this was discussed somewhere before but I figure I would bring it back up into this.

Now I am not bashing YouTube tests, I use them to check the simplicity from a app but you can not put all your trust into these test." }-
very nicely said :thumb:

[icr]

-{ Quote: "Agree with Namor ... All these samples are not Zero Day malwares ... If they were Zero Day, then i guess they won't be listed on MDL .." }-

Why not? coz at MDL you can get the time when that malware been active

[AvinashR]

-{ Quote: "Why not? coz at MDL you can get the time when that malware been active" }-

You haven't understood me... I said these listed malware are not Zero day .. You can say that either these are fairly new or ITW malwares.

[Kernelwars]

I am pretty sure if languy sent a request to prevx ...he would have received a test key or something. why prevx dont need to give any 14 days or 30 daystrial? it works...period and they know it .. we know it. it keeps system fast.. prevents keeping malware away.. they will even help remove anything if the software miss.. Who can beat it? sorry got a lil carried away..

[cruelsister]

I'm really disappointed in the comments on this thread. Languy99 to me appears to be someone who is trying to educate and to help. He has stated that no one is paying him and I certainly haven't seen any Security advertising on his space. So could it be that he is spending his time in an effort to steer non malware geeks away from inferior products? And if he's not being paid perhaps he does these videos simply because he is kind?

On the Net bashers predominate- I suppose it is much easier to criticize than in the spirit of altruism to instruct. I was hoping that the Wilders community was a cut above.

Guess that feeling was sadly misplaced.

[DOSawaits]

What do you want to see ?
Someone "testing" out some malwares and see if he could spot them with the Task Manager ?

Do you really think most & latest malware is so lame to be glittering there in taskman ? Most malware is run&quit. Someone checking out if he's clean using only the task manager is a joke, not even worth a thread in the first place.

[Matthijs5nl]

-{ Quote: "Oh i see .... So i guess you must have saw him allowing malware to run outside the Comodo Sandbox... Have you ever saw that? I guess you haven't ... No need to mention the conspiracy behind that..

No doubt is he's doing a good job, but hey he's also misleading people who are watching him ... Now Question arises, How? That's what you better know than me..." }-
You surely are right there :).

He always says: at a firewall alert I just press allow. He indeed does that with Outpost and ZoneAlarm and so on, but not with Comodo.
But who cares, I never watch his Comodo videos. He was even "testing" those ~ Snipped as per TOS (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/faq.php?faq=wilders_tos#faq_wilders_tos_1) ~ Comodo System Cleaner and Uninstaller tools which are absolutely compelete junk, without any doubt. If someone of Comodo is defending those products he will lose all his credibility in one second.

[RejZoR]

These Youtube tests are nothing scientific, but if you're familiar with the program, you can extract quite some useful info from these videos, mostly how programs behave when detection occurs.

[Saraceno]

RejZoR agree. YouTube entertainment, people shouldn't think too much into it.

[Rampastein]

While it's good that Languy uses his time for "educating" people, he should do it well, without misleading people or he shouldn't do it at all.
-{ Quote: "Because it is impossible to test an HIPS? It is impossible to say out of a strange warning whether something is malware or not, so for example a newbie may think that the second link he tried was genuine program and just click allow without saferun.

The fact is it is impossible to test out a HIPS program, all of them." }-
He still tests Comodo "correctly" like an advanced user; as a Comodo mod he Sandboxes and blocks all malware. If he really allowed something in OA then it's a sign of being biased.
-{ Quote: "At worst, he's giving people who watch the wrong impression of these security apps." }-
Indeed.

[atomomega]

Languy99 (just as any other software reviewer on youtube) allows us (regular people with some knowledge on computers, without virtual machines nor powerful systems nor tweaked OS) to see how a product looks like and how it interacts with the end user.

If you don't like to hear his comments about this program being better than that other one, just turn off your speakers.

He is not a technician, nor a security advisor nor a major leagues security software programmer. So his reviews must be taken as a general preview of the program. Not an in-depth performance/detection/cleanup test.

So please. Let's hope a mod comes around soon to close this thread. Irrelevant IMO.

[Cudni]

Enough said on the subject. Thank you all