Anyone has info about this antivirus?

I just bumped into a new av software, it is called ViRobot, by looking at the features it sounds good and the resource requerimients are low. Has anyone info about this av's performance? is it another kav or anything else - based program? I just want to know something about it before trying to install it.

 

VB100 also has info on ViRobot. Check the June 2003 comparative. Apparently, It is good for ITW viruses, though there may be some false suspicions (one was noted by VB). Macro detection is good, but could have been better at 98.84%. Polymorphic detection is really bad at about 33% and Standard virus detection is not praiseworthy at 73.69%.

Sorry if I irritated you.

Cheers,
Firecat

 

In my humble opinion, if this AV achieves 100% at serious-dangerous ITW malware so it should be OKay when used in the real-world scenario. Other zoo sample test sets can be negligible.

When talk about real-world scenario, who really knows that every AVs achieves VB100% can protect us against incoming new threats right on time.

 

I got this great bargain on Virobot 4 from amazon.com so I'll test it and put it on my wife's notebook (if any good). A friend of mine likes it.
Hopefully it will be a decent product since I am dropping the ball on DrWeb(which protected my wife’s notebook). If time permits I might do a quick review on this av.


tECHNODROME

 

Any specific reason for this, Technodrome? Are you still using it?

Looking forward to this

 

In a test (discussed here: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=59981) made by Andreas Marx for the german magazine c't that program was one of the worst.
It failed to detect all ITW-malware (detected 96,7% on demand, 90,1% on access) and detected only 26% of Backdoors (Zoo) and 14% of Trojans (Zoo).

 

Yes its customer support. Basically they took my money but never delivered the product.

Last time I heard from Element 5 was 2 days ago ( this going on for days now):

Dear Mr.-----,
We are sorry to hear that you have not yet received the product that you have ordered. We have contacted the publisher again to remind them of your purchase. If you do not hear from the publisher within the next 24 hours, please contact us again.


I am trying to get my money back ...


tECHNODROME

 

Thanks for pointing this out...But the only test that matters to me its the tECHNODROME test.

Andreas Marx tests are for kids.....and magazines


tECHNODROME

 

Intrigued Anymore details about this 'test'? KAV and McAfee do well I presume?

 

Just look into the thread I mentioned above; I've posted a short summary of the test there (KAV and McAfee are mentioned, too)

 

I don’t follow his tests so I got no details. McAfee and KAV will detect almost anything no surprises here….


tECHNODROME

 

Personally I don't like programs which are unable to install with some other av:s already installed on my PC as McAfee for instance (realtime scan disabled of course). Even DrWeb is able to install when I have some other av:s already on my PC but not Hauri. That's why I was unable to test Hauri ViRobot 4.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

That pretty much depends on if certain AV has compatibility issues with another one. For example avast! and NOD32 can work together in real-time without any problems,while avast! and Norton(or Kaspersky) cannot.

 

He makes tests for many german PC-magazines...

According to his test: KAV detected 99,7% of Zoo-Backdoors and 98,7% of Zoo-Trojans. McAfee: 98,2% / 91,7%.
Even Bitdefender (Pro 8 ) had higher detection rates than KAV (99,7% / 99,1%).

 

That's why I have already asked elsewhere the amount of Backdoor/Trojan samples of that test but no answer.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Something above 60.000 samples (I've already mentioned it here: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=59981&p=340206 ).

Regards, Joerg

 

I got that 60k already but how many Backdoors and how many Trojans?

Btw, within 60k of RANDOMLY picked samples, no av scores even 99 %. They have to be verified as infected by some certain av or something like that. Why, in this case those test results are not a result of randomly picked samples but something else. I hate 100 % detecting rates! It's now the same that there is in VirusBulletin, when anyone can add those ItW samples to their definitions BEFORE the test from the latest official ItW list if they want to, a job that has no add value because you can make more important things among trojan like nasties instead of that.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Joerg,

I know who Marx is and what he does lately. There were many discussions about his tests here at Wilders.



tECHNODROME

 

Oh yes, I read them. And we at Rokop had similar discussions, too

 

thx for the info, since i don't want to mess up windows, i guess i'll stay with NOD32 as it is an already proven solution.

 

I trialed ViRobot last Fall and it is very light on resource usage.
The size of their definitions database is a question.I never got a clear answer from the developer about that.

I remember that their uninstaller was the sloppiest I have used!

 

Their database has currently about 30000 entries (according to their website ).

regards,
Joerg

 

You picked the right solution of these two! Just add Ewido too beside NOD and you are very well protected.

Best regards,
Firefighter!