DriveSentry tests

Has anyone come across any serious testing of DriveSentry? I think its a cool app but how does it perform in comparison to more established apps?

 

None that I know of.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7Ew307X9zY&feature=channel

Matt from remove malware.com does a pretty good review on it in this video,check it out.

 

The third review video is better,demonstrating a test using bad url's.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejW4kAPlBAY&feature=related

 

Thanks for the info.

 

Allthough Matt's test are simple, he seems to use links of 'latest' threats (less than a week old or so). In a 'test' of Avira V9, one got through (out of 10), same with Avast and AVG Free (no rootkit protection) let a rootkit pass. So the fact that DS stooped all, 20 out of 20 (only two arbitrarely to my opinion), is a good sign.

The trickle feed of DS is really a nice touch, by pussing updates one by one through the network, you have a relatively actual black list data base (maybe reason it scored high).

Now I have no idea how effective DS is against old and zoo virusses, but also in my testing it scores well against latest in the wild.

 

In Matt's tests DS was catching the malware as it wrote to the drive. To say that it used blacklisting to prevent this malware from installing in this case is not true.

 

Really a resounding "good tool" thumbs up from Matt: makes me want to check it out.

Is it really free ??

 

I tested it two days ago against a sample of 80 new malwares - it got 2 of them. A2, Avira, F-Secure and Prevx got over 60%.

 

its much better using CIS than driver sentry , CIS is totally free , no nagg screen afer 30 days, virus data base is almost 3 million , and its going up faster to be one of the best 3 Avs in the world.

also i see no DS real tests like made to nav32 or avira.

 

do u mind keeping CIS out of this thread? this thread is not discussing what is better, its looking for professional tests, not opinions, thx.

 

its not opinion man its facts , go read some article about it and than u maybe change your mind

no more off topic , the only thing i agree with ya d00d

 

When I first tried it out some time ago it worked great with NOD32. I probably tested it with NOD32 because at the time NOD32 seemed to me to be slipping & I thought the addition of another AV would be great. It worked great but for reasons I never figured out after the initial install it would never update. This to me is like a ladder with 2 rungs missing, very dangerous. I used the free version so I never really found out if the Pay version had these problems. The deal breaker was when I tried to uninstall & reinstall, and it would not uninstall. I then gave the idea up as a failed experiment. I feel that any AV free or pay should at least update sometimes & if necessary uninstall & not require me to restore a snapshot image to uninstall it. I really hope that they can get beyond these 2 items sometime so I can think about trying DriveSentry again. The fact that it catches Viruses efficiently doesn't surprise me. I just wished it worked better.

 

It does seem efficient and the DS service uses little to no CPU time or RAM. Matt's tests are pretty good, but I was wondering if anyone new of a test against a large collection of malware. I'm using DS on a laptop and so far it works great and the lifetime license is very cheap. I haven't tried to uninstall yet.

 

What do you mean "it got 2 of them"? Did you allow the malware to install when DS promted? If so, the malware would have already done its job. You can't rely on DS blacklisting to save the day. What you can rely on though is being promted on anything that tries to write to the drive. This is what DS is all about.

I test loads of malware with DS on a test machine and it blocks 100% of malware as it tries to write to the drive. As far as I'm concerned this is a pass for DS.

 

Hi, this was a simple on demand scan of inactive malware, not an infected system test. The malware was simply sitting in a folder and scanned with each AV. In this test DS detected 2 out of 80.

 

Of course DS is not going to have the same detection rate as the other top AV's. DS's strength is its ability to prevent malware from infecting your system in the first place. It's prevention, through its HIPS...that DS focuses on.

 

200% correct!

It's main job is being a HIPS program,not an AV program.

 

links comparing DS and CIS plz?

 

Are you referring to the two low risk pop-ups? I did not say the blacklist cought them.

There restriction of adding only registry items from the Software HKU/HKLM is really stupid. Removing this from drop down menu, would make DS effective to block all auto run/system/network entries. But they told me they were coming with a big new suite in 4 to 6 weeks. Also the allow control is on registry/disk level, when you add special rules for files/folders/registry, these should be added to allow/deny set, to make it really effective. For instance I do want Internet Explorer to change the registry keys Internet Explorer, but I do not want it to change Autorun entries, same goes with Ms Installer, it may change the RUN entries and the pending file rename operation, but not other auto runs entries, etc.

Regards

 

Do you now if they plan to add memory protection with this new suite? That seems to be a missing level of protection for DS.

 

i can give u link show how many sig CIS got , over 4 million atm DS is about half if i remember correct...also DS never been tested , and don't expect high detection of it or better than cis

cis got 96% when avira hit 99% in test i saw , so do the calculation by your self how "high" can go DS av hehe

 

Demoneye,

DS has over 3.5 million figerprints, the trickle feed updates (one by one) really is a nice idea of DS, increasing detection chance of failrly new malwares.

I like my AV to have as less as possible fingerprints. Less fingerprints means that the AV is better in using general fingerprints. More general fingerprints means a better chance of detecting a new variant with an old fingerprint.

This is not a factual opinion, just based on logic, still . . .

Regards Kees

 

thank you for clarifying some things to some people kees