Free AV Malware Test UPDATED JAN 16 2012

Thanks for the test, I'm going to watch for this in the future.

[Brandonn2010]

Updated percentages, rounded to nearest %:

Comodo - 131/210 - 62%
Unthreat - 131/210 - 62%
Avira - 128/210 - 61%

AVG - 120/210 - 57%

Avast! - 104/210 - 50%
Foriclient Lite - 105/210 - 50%

Panda - 13/31 - 42%
MSE - 87/210 - 41%

[Breakfastofchumps]

Thanks for your time and effort narenbisht

[bollity]

Disable defense+ of comodo and test again.

[Brandonn2010]

Originally Posted by bollity

Disable defense+ of comodo and test again.

That was with Def+ ? I'd hate to see its score without.

[andyman35]

Originally Posted by Brandonn2010

That was with Def+ ? I'd hate to see its score without.

It says Comodo AV rather than CIS,so I'm thinking D+ wasn't used.If it was it'd unfairly skew the results,since the other products aren't full suites.

Perhaps Naren will confirm this?

I'm not very familiar with Unthreat,but it appears to be a competent newcomer.

To my knowledge Comodo AV does not come with defense+ . I think that packed with the firewall.

[Brandonn2010]

If it was with just Comodo's AV I've got to give them props for doing this well, especially against 0-day malware.

[pbust]

Originally Posted by narenbisht

Update 2 Jan 18 2012, checkout 1st post.

Are you testing signature scanning only? I mean, if the malware is available from a URL (-www.maliciousdomain.com/malware.exe-) are you testing the product during download or only its file-signature component (ie right-click scan)?

[ichito]

Some users of forum -safegroup.pl- lead tests of some AV (free and paid)...not all and not always the same AV...latest results of free AV

18 Jan. 2012
Avira 2012 - 123/162 (76%)
KPCD - 84/162 (51,9%)

16 Jan. 2012
MSE 2 - 89/152 (58,6%)
CIS 2012 - 115/152 (75,5 %)
UnThreat AV free - 119/152 (78,28%)
KPCD - 100/152 (65,8%)


15 Jan.2012
MSE 2 - 75/124 (60,5%)
KPCD - 106/128 (82,8%)
Panda Cloud AV - 110/128 (86%)
AVG 2012 Free - 100/128 (78,13%)

14 Jan.2012
CIS 2012 - 109/128 (85,2%)
KPCD - 106/128 (82,8%)
-http://forum.safegroup.pl/01-2012-paczki-malware-niebezpieczne-strony-pliki-itp-t5381-120.html

------------
today (19. Jan.)
KPCD - 126/162 (77,77%)
Avira - 133/162 (82,1%)

[narenbisht]

Originally Posted by bollity

Disable defense+ of comodo and test again.

D+ is disabled.

I am only testing signatures, heuristics, behaviour blocker, etc. Purely AV test.

[narenbisht]

Originally Posted by pbust

Are you testing signature scanning only? I mean, if the malware is available from a URL (-www.maliciousdomain.com/malware.exe-) are you testing the product during download or only its file-signature component (ie right-click scan)?

This is just a simple RealTime Protection/Detection Test. I download 0-Day malware mainly from MDL, MBL, Malc0de & CleanMX & sometimes I look for other sites for samples. I collect 0-Day malware in a folder & check for the duplicate malware i.e same malware file. First RightClick Scan & remaining are executed to check if they are detected. Hope this is clear.

[cruelsister]

I think the testers are missing an essential part of Product evaluations. There is the assumption that whatever files are downloaded from the malware link sites are actual malware. This is far from the case! Depending on the day from 15-30% of these files are totally innocuous (keygens, cracks, etc).

This must be what is going on as the results that they are getting for some products (if indeed tested at default settings) are so far off from the multitude of previous results to make the current test suspect.

[narenbisht]

Updated Jan 19 2012, checkout 1st post.

This is the last & final update.

Hav fun
Naren

[narenbisht]

Originally Posted by cruelsister

I think the testers are missing an essential part of Product evaluations. There is the assumption that whatever files are downloaded from the malware link sites are actual malware. This is far from the case! Depending on the day from 15-30% of these files are totally innocuous (keygens, cracks, etc).

This must be what is going on as the results that they are getting for some products (if indeed tested at default settings) are so far off from the multitude of previous results to make the current test suspect.

I have already mentioned not a professional test, Just a simple test.

And atleast Avira & Avast I also tested with All Threats Enabled in Avira & PUP enabled in Avast. The difference was not much, just 1-2 more detections.
I didn't added this detection in the results.

But as I said not much difference 1-2 more detection.

Thanxx
Naren

narenbisht,

Thanks for your comparison of products. I'll take common everyday testing anytime . It means more to me than over controlled enviroments with what seems over controlled results. Test my product as long as it does well gets old. Along as everybody gets the same pitch lets see what happens.

[The Hammer]

Most of the abreviations I can figure out ichito but what is KPCD?

[ALiasEX]

Despite being against posting policy the thread managed to stay alive until the end.

[Cloud]

Originally Posted by The Hammer

Most of the abreviations I can figure out ichito but what is KPCD?

Kingsoft PC Doctor (KPD/KPCD)

[The Hammer]

Originally Posted by Cloud

Kingsoft PC Doctor (KPD/KPCD)

Thanks for that.

[ichito]

Thanks Cloud

[pianistaPL]

today (19. Jan.)
KPCD - 126/162 (77,77%)
Avira - 133/162 (82,1%)

Panda Cloud AV - 137/162 (84,6%)

[pbust]

Originally Posted by narenbisht

I tried Panda Cloud 1.5.1, the reason I didn't included it coz for many detected threats it said not neutralize & gave online recommendation which I find uncomfortable.

Naren, can you please PM me the md5 checksums of the files you tested that were "not neutralized"? This would really help us improve the product for everyone else.

[narenbisht]

Originally Posted by pbust

Naren, can you please PM me the md5 checksums of the files you tested that were "not neutralized"? This would really help us improve the product for everyone else.

Sorry, I deleted the samples as I dont really keep them after testing as for any test I download the fresh samples again.

But one thing I have noticed, just go to any malware sites & download 30-40 malware samples & test against panda you will find few that are not neutralized.

The prob may be with panda's cleaning function. Is this prob with other Panda's products too or with PandaCloud only? If only with PandaCloud then why, especially when you have successful cleaning tools in your other products?

[fax]

Originally Posted by narenbisht

Sorry, I deleted the samples as I dont really keep them after testing as for any test I download the fresh samples again.

May be next time you test you will post also the MD5 otherwise it seems at bit all in the air....

Thanks,
Fax