AV-Test Feb 2015 - Windows 8/8.1

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Thankful, Mar 25, 2015.

  1. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I disagree. They use different testing methods and samples and if a product scores similar in more tests, it means it as consistency across all conditions. If it only scores well in one testa nd not the others, you start to wonder why...
     
  2. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Even then, I still think it's better for a smaller vendor like Emsisoft to be tested by one of the big known orgs, than be tested by several less known testing org because it may be cheaper, and customers may not trust the results because they have not heard of that tester before.

    Symantec didn't want to be included in the file-detection test so they choosed to not be tested at all by AV-C, even if they most likely would be great in the RWPT and others. G-Data on the other hand didn't want to be included in the AV-C RWPT so they are not tested either. For them it's not a financial question but a methodology question, and that they can't cherry pick and skip over tests that is included in a test serie. Suck in 1 test, perform great in others...what's the problem :isay:

    Different samples sure, but it wouldn't hurt if AV-Test found a way to increase their 0-day sample set a bit as they only include 208 samples.

    We see it all the time, some products score average year after year by some tester, and better by other testers. Then you may wonder if there is a problem in the product or....
     
  3. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    If it scores badly year after year, it's most likely a bad product. Just look at MSE...
     
  4. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Yes according to that test.
    But MSE scores bad in all tests year after year....a "good" example of the consistency that you mentioned earlier I would say.
     
  5. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    And not just that, it's bad across the board, in all tests, even in amateur Youtube tests...
     
  6. vlk

    vlk AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Posts:
    621
    "DRep" is the new type of detections that take into account the origin of the executable. Originally it was short for "Domain Reputation" but now it goes well beyond that.

    In Avast, we take special care to be able to track the source URLs of binary files. That is, for these detections, it makes a difference if the scanned files are downloaded from URL X or Y. It turns out that these are very powerful detections, especially if connected with some machine learning models that minimize the FP rates.

    This is another reason why we introduced the HTTPS scanner (and why it's so important to us) -- to be able to track the origin even for files received via HTTPS channels (which is about 30% of all web traffic today).

    Thanks,
    Vlk
     
  7. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Which is why antivirus companies want to track certain things that users do online. People think it's just because they are evil and want to track users. But the reality is, they want to monitor conditions so they can provide better protection. Detection with context can tell or explain a lot of things on how malware originated, where, if it is spread from same domains etc...
     
  8. darts

    darts Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Posts:
    456
    Location:
    Netherlands
    So Avast is realy getting back in good detection again? I hope so. I also like the good scores of Eset. I think it is maybe time too switch from Kaspersky too Avast or Eset.
     
  9. Mayahana

    Mayahana Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2014
    Posts:
    2,220
    The problem is, products like Norton rely on several cohesive engines functioning together. A single filescan test doesn't show the whole picture. Norton scores amazingly well when 'all things' are factored, and the test is conducted properly.. Sigs, Sonar, Insight, Reputation, Heuristics, and IPS. But when any one thing is disabled, or not tested, it can impact the performance overall. Norton has very powerful IPS integrated in that works with it's AV to detect some pretty cool threats most things would miss. A similar concept in place with ZyXEL and Fortinet UTM appliances that leverage IPS as part of the detection process. I don't know any security researcher that doesn't consider Norton 2015 a serious contender these days when all technologies are factored together.
     
  10. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Looks like it. I'll wait for one or two more tests to see if they keep consistency or even improve the scores, but yeah...
     
  11. See post Windows Defender Whacked, also applies to faulted AV-testing discussed in this thread, let's discuss this in the other thread please.
     
  12. Mortal Raptor

    Mortal Raptor Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Posts:
    1,013
    With all those layers, it surprises me how NS is one if the lightest solutions, great engineering I must say
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2015
  13. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    MSE is not light by any definition. Especially considering how little technologies do the security checking on stuff.
     
  14. JoakimM

    JoakimM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Posts:
    51
    Location:
    Lomma, Sweden
    In that case, anyone now why Avira only request their Pro version to be tested, not their Free version as both Avast and AVG? Something fishy concerning protection levels here? On the other hand, Panda ONLY submits its free version...

    /J
     
  15. Mayahana

    Mayahana Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2014
    Posts:
    2,220
    I think you mean NS..
     
  16. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    5,614
    Location:
    Milan and Seoul
    Protection I believe is the same for both except you don't get the mail module and game mode with the free version. For testing purposes I think by offering the pro version is a form of promotion along the lines of perception, 'paid is better'. There is nothing fishy about protection levels, the free version I believe has the same detection as the pro version, except you get some promotional material with it.
     
  17. Charyb

    Charyb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Posts:
    679
    Doesn't the pro version come with the web protection module? In the free version, I believe you are required to install the toolbar for web protection.
     
  18. Mortal Raptor

    Mortal Raptor Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Posts:
    1,013
    yes offcourse, typo ;)
     
  19. Mortal Raptor

    Mortal Raptor Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Posts:
    1,013
    I meant NS I typed MS by mistake, typo. MSE has no layers :D
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.