AV-Comparatives August 2005 Overview

Well me too... . The company I work for is using Sophos, my home network (4 comps) is using NOD32 and I am currently using KAV/KIS 2006 pre-beta... knock, knock - so far so good... I think all 3 are great products for enviroments they are used in, but still Sophos would do better for their marketing plans if they aimed to make their protection better (like NOD32 did) for the test, then to decide not to be in tests anymore... in the end those test are, as far as i see them, not about who scores best, but who is ready to improve upon a bad score... just my opinion.

Regards,
vee

 

if av-comparatives continues to still get more and more popularity, the pressure from the users will grow to see also sophos tested, maybe then sophos will in some years again want to get listed in the tests. i also do not understand the decision of the marketing peoples, i always tought that every kind of publicity for free (!) is good. and getting e.g. "standard" in our tests is not easy; i think it can be considered like a "passed" in the tests of e.g. WestCostLabs (with the difference that e.g. WCL tests have more importance for e.g. marketing and that they are not free of fee) . But I accept their decision and follow/respect their wish.

 

I remember that IBK said that he`ll use an AV that got advanced+ in the August 2005 test...a don´t know, but my 6 sense says that he is (or will) using NOD32!! hehe

 

IBK, don't let anyone or any company pressure you into doing ANYTHING. I consider, and I know many others do also, your site to be at the same time one of the most comprehensive and OBJECTIVE testing sites around ... keep on going just as you have been.

Acadia

 

The only AV test that I trust is Av-comparatives and Virusbulletin...

By the way, maybe the surprise that IBK is talking about KAV is that it has got 100% of all malware...

 

No shame in earning a little money.

 

Few things i notice immediately:

NOD32 & Bitdefender score their first Advanced+ in a On Demand test. Both are improving rapidly.

F-prot is not doing very well compare to 2004. ( Ironically i stop using it at start of 2005)

On the free AV side.
AVG has its first rating
Avast stay as " Standard "
AntiVir ( H + BEDV ) has its first advance rating. ( I hope they improve even more )

 

IBK,

Can I ask whether Dr Web missed the Advanced level by much?

In particular, did the DOS samples have much effect on the level reached by DW?

 

No, the DOS samples does not have affect to the decision which level is reached. I look on all tables (e.g. with and without DOS/otheros) and Drweb did scored good enough to get advanced; but it is on the top of those listed in standard if it is that what you mean). I know in the report the levels are written near the total percentages and users may think they are given exclusivly due them alone, but it is not so (but anyway easier to understand and to explain the results if I am asked). I also spare some space in the report

P.S.: even if it does not have affect to the levels, just for information, there were also some issues with drweb (crashing), but they are now all fixed in the meantime (at least all crashing files I reported). Even if a condition is that the program should not crash or cause major problems during the scan, i tested it anyway (even if it was known and reported before that drweb has some crashing problems).

 

I see Symantec made a return to Advanced + from standard.

 

No, please take a look in which kind of tests the products reached what. on-demand test (february and august) and retrospective test (may/november) are 2 different things.

 

So in the on demand test Symantec retained it's Advanced + rating from the previous on demand test.

 

$0.38 earned today; seems like it works worser than before...

btw, dunno if someone noticied it, but since a ~week the document with the FAQ is updated; some few more Q/A added etc.

 

The major question is, how good NOD will be after 5 months, when it is missing updates about 2 months size?

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Don't worry, remember that DrWeb has actually over 6.6 % signatures more in their nasty/risky databases, which I assume were not within in this test.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

I tried that too. Even with the beta riskware signatures of Dr.Web it would not change its results, which is not a surprise, as in the test-set of av-comparatives spyware/adware/jokes/etc. are not included.

 

That's interesting to note. So presumably AntiVir free would score the same as AntiVir Premium, even though the latter includes protection for Adware/Spyware?

 

Yes, that's very probably.

 

IBK, I hope that you include the Adware/Spyware detection to the next tests...

 

next thing that i plan tol include is a false positive test-set and more products.
building up a new good sorted spyware/adware test-set will take time, so atm i can not even say when i will start to do that and when (and how) it will be included; for sure not before 2007 and probably only a passed/failed without percentages.

 

Good news, IBK

The false-positive feature on your tests will be very handy...

 

I just get the details of august's test from a chinese security website. The results do surprise me... ~~snip~~

 

Link please!

 

it is a 7 pages pdf file, for member only. And I will not provide it without the permission from av-comparatives. Meanwhile it will be online very soon, so please be patient.

~~snip~~

 

Bootlegged AV-Comparatives August 2005 results?