Dennis Technology Labs - Q4 AV Report

Dennis Technology Labs have just released their Q4 Home Anti-Virus protection support. Nothing particularly new - Norton, ESET, Kaspersky and Bitdefender 2013 products perform well, MSE has a few issues.

Report: http://dennistechnologylabs.com/reports/s/a-m/2012/DTL_2012_Q4_Home.1.pdf

 

The FAQ in the PDF claims no vendor sponsored the test

 

Bleh... also, the test claims Norton Internet Security and Trend Micro Internet Security, both, performed better than BitDefender Internet Security.

This, I don't agree with. Rather suspicious.

 

MSE really getting hammered lately.

 

DTL was sponsored by Symantec in one of previous tests...

 

...and sponsored by other vendors in other reports. this one specifically says it wasn't sponsored.

 

The fact is that I don't trust sponsored test...if you know what I mean...

 

lol @ mse negative protection rating

you didn't even read the test... it says the test was unsponsored

 

We were talking about previous tests and their credibility....
Plus, there are waaaaaay too few participants...

 

Missing is maybe F-Secure wich together with KIS and BIS have been at the top in the other tests. Plus Webroot wich I personally miss.

Sponsored or not, this time I agree more with the results than previous tests done by DTL

 

I only take AVC and AV-Test into account...

 

Dennis Publishing - the publishers of PC Pro, Computer Shopper, Evo and various other magazines (see www.dennis.co.uk) - has no credibility issues.

Simply put, a publishing company in Dennis' position cannot afford any scandal whatsoever and it would be fairly clear if they were fixing results based on a payment. It just doesn't happen. Dennis is a huge £80 million turnover UK publisher. They aren't going to accept relatively minuscule payment from one security company to bend their results in their favour.

Of course, results are always based on the criteria they are matched against. For instance, Dennis' PC Pro magazine has a big security roundup in their current issue and Bitdefender Internet Security 2013 came out on top, with Kaspersky second.

 

Thanks for the test.
Seems like Norton came up on top in this one.

 

Indeed, this makes the test not interesting for me.

 

chris, thanks for bringing up the details.

 

seems about right ,i think
chriswiles was spot on,and it seems Trend continue their good protection.Other than that Norton did well which some will never like

 

So Dennis is now an "unsponsored" test but Norton keeps leading it

 

Not looking good for MSE, time for MS to up the effort.

 

I question the validity of this test having read some of the methodology.

"We test with Windows XP SP3 and Internet Explorer 7 due to the high prevalence of internet threats that work with this combination"

and

"A selection of legitimate but vulnerable software was pre-installed on the target systems. These posed security risks, as they contained known security issues. They included versions of Adobe Flash Player, Adobe Reader and Java"

So basically they have to test obsolete, unpatched systems rocking Adobe Reader 8 or something as up to date software doesn't have enough holes in it.

I know you can argue that the security software should protect you no matter how decrepit your system is but most people are on Windows 7 now and auto updating software is very common i.e. Flash, Adobe Reader. This is not a representative real world test for the majority of users.

I take away from this test that if you are running a Windows 7 or 8 system with Windows updates and updated software your attack surface is going to be massively reduced.

 

Looks like somebody is a bit jealous.

 

Oh come on. What's jealousy got to do with any of this?

These are software products, not some prized high dollar value/unearthly possession that anyone could, or should be jealous about

 

You are absolutely right. If you update your software you'll reduce the attack surface massively. And if you disable the Java web browser plugin that will really help too

We are testing the security products, not the operating system nor additional software such as Flash. As such it makes sense to test in sub-optimum conditions, with software containing vulnerabilities that cyber-criminals are abusing at the time of testing.

To use a standard analogy, if we tested car tyres we'd do so in challenging condition, with wet, greasy roads. A test on clear, dry surfaces would prove only that the tyres were basically functional.

As it happens, Windows XP is still used a lot, both by businesses and consumers. My understanding is that Windows 7 has only just surpassed XP's market share. It's being used on around 44% of systems while I believe Windows XP is on just under 40%. The research for those figures is linked to in the reports.

Best wishes,
Simon Edwards, Dennis Technology Labs

 

Agree...many don't like to see Norton perform!

 

Agreed. These tests are just embarrassing for them. I know they can do better.

Nice to see ESET do as well as they did but this will be the year I finally make good on my decision to stop renewing it. I have been paying since 2006 and have not used it for the last 3 years.

 

Norton has been at or near the top of most tests, so this is not a surprise.
When I was using it, I found the support forum to be excellent.