AV-C, AV-Test, VB Testing Methodology

[Brandonn2010]

Can someone give me the quick version on their testing methodologies? Which tester is the most real-world? I quickly checked AV-Test's and theirs seemed the most real-world for on-demand (repair), rather than just scanning a folder containing malware.

[Sher]

I don't want to go into details of their testing procedures and stuff, but for me, it's AV-C first always.

[fax]

Very scientific approach!

[Firecat]

All 3 are reliable, but for me it's AV-C first, then VB/RAP and lastly AV-test. I have enough faith in AV-C that I believe a product rated "Standard" in AV-C is still good enough to protect me in all but the most extreme of cases.

[The Hammer]

Originally Posted by Firecat

All 3 are reliable, but for me it's AV-C first, then VB/RAP and lastly AV-test. I have enough faith in AV-C that I believe a product rated "Standard" in AV-C is still good enough to protect me in all but the most extreme of cases.

Standard is good enough. I saw such an opinion stated some time ago by an expert in the field who posts here.

[Firecat]

My opinion was actually based on what I observed in the real world for ordinary/extraordinary surfing habits. Most of the time even the "Standard" rated products do a good job of protection. It's nice to hear an expert agrees

[Frank the Perv]

Possibly like others here, I’m biased toward AV-C.

The proprietor has posted here on his methods and ways for many years.

For those who have been around here long enough, we’ve watched him grow from being virtually a ‘garage tester’ to producing a very professional and rigorous product.

He’s more careful about what he posts now (he used to give us more of an inside look at things), but it’s always good to hear what he has to say.



-ftp

[Noob]

AV-C seems like the only one that carea about updating their procedures or testing software in different ways instead of relying solely on Scanning/On Demand tests etc.

[Dark Shadow]

Originally Posted by Firecat

My opinion was actually based on what I observed in the real world for ordinary/extraordinary surfing habits. Most of the time even the "Standard" rated products do a good job of protection. It's nice to hear an expert agrees

Is a standard rating also based on to many False positive's,another words the detection may be as strong as advanced but to many legitimate files get flagged and in turn lowers its overall rating or am I wrong.

[Firecat]

Originally Posted by Dark Shadow

Is a standard rating also based on to many False positive's,another words the detection may be as strong as advanced but to many legitimate files get flagged and in turn lowers its overall rating or am I wrong.

Yes, FPs can reduce the rating of a product in AV-C, but what I was saying is any product that passes the testing, irrespective of FPs, is generally very good in the real world. So say a product has had less FPs and scores 93% on the detection rate, it will (in my experience) still be very good in the real world.