av-comparatives news

Heh heh...I see that this time my guessing methodology turned out almost 100% OK

The only places I went wrong was Dr.Web (I expected 'Advanced') and Norman (I was expecting 'Standard').

By the way, Andreas, you should update the test results, the Dr.Web engine version is 4.33.4.7270 and the program version is 4.33.2.06080 (the results sheet have got the two mixed up).

Actually both of them have done a very good job of improvement. Look at the results and percentage rates, both are higher than they were before. If you look at BitDefender, the somewhat disappointing OtherOS malware detection was the only place where it didn't fare very well. Read the results carefully, BitDefender made a very good improvement in every single field of detection except the otherOS malware.

Pretty good job by BitDefender IMO.

Good job from AVIRA, Eset, Symantec, GDATA, Kaspersky and TrustPort....

 

Hi!

So what's the main point of the results? We always get some percentages. Any anylezed results.

 

BitDefender results are yet to come. Latest engine updates were released in late August so they basically missed the schedule. Will be interesting on next On-Demand test though...

 

Though I'm not satisfied with the improvements. If you look at BitDefender, they added over a 200.000 signatures (almost 45% incrase of the amount of signatures) since February's test, and they still are 'Advanced' level.

Also Dr. Web had a very huge signature addition around 31.000 (also an increase of more then 25%), and also they stuck on their old rating 'Standard'.

Don't understand me wrong, it are still two of my favorite programs, but I'm somewhat dissapointed in the actual progression they made. If we look at AVIRA, they can do it too, others should be capable as well they have enough expertise for it.

 

Majority of the 200000 signatures for BitDefender were spyware signatures (BitDefender was upgraded to detect spyware in March 2006 and that alone added over 100000 signatures). Therefore the improvements were not really that much as you say. I'm pretty satisfied with BD's result as it is, but Dr.Web's results also seem strange to me.

 

I myself was very very impressed with Avira's increase. For a freebie, 99% is pretty darn good. Even if that was the paid version, I still think the freebie is probably close to that.

 

Since no spyware or adware samples were included in the test, I think I'm right in saying that the free version of Antivir would produce exactly the same results as the premium version in this test.

Suggers

 

Only 1 update intervale per 24 hours kinda kills that. And don't say you can click Update manualle coz most of regular Joes don't do that. And me either.
It's 2006 for god sake, software should do that instead of me. Well if it's limitation of free software, then too bad. I just don't like the idea.

 

Are you talking about Antivir? It can update automatically, silently and you can use certain process control programs to kill the nag screen.

It takes 2 minutes to configure the thing to update automatically and invisibly as many times as you want per day.

Granted I use Avast, but mostly because Antivir doesn't like my computer.

 

Regarding the complaint by F-Protect, did not all the other AVs face the same problem? Yet they did better.

I was hoping for a significant improvement in F-Protect, and will be interested in seeing IBK's comparison between V3 and V4.

Regarding Avirs, it may be my lack of perception, but I have the idea that although it has been an excellent AV as far as detection rates are concerned, it does not run as well as some others. I read a lot of complaints regarding updates for example.

Jerry

 

It does have its issues. It doesn't work right on my computer. I do use Avast, but I still defend Antivir.

 

It is F-PROT.

Great job AVIRA! That is friggin awesome work in my opinion. A huge amount of effort has been put into the product and it shows I may have to buy the premium to support them yet

A little shocked at f-prot and dr. web, especially dr. web since f-prot v3 is really an old and outdated product and engine.

Cheers,

Alphalutra1

 

Thanks, and maybe I'll get it right from now on.
What does PROT stand for?

[It is F-PROT.]

Thanks,
Jerry

 

For me, antivir's update is not a problem at all. Personally I prefer to do the manual update. If people really want the autoupdates, they could setup the autoupdate job as many as they like.

However, antivir is lack of http scanner, which i think, is really important. I hope antivir will implement it in the near future.

shek

 

Good for AntiVir. Glad I reinstalled it yesterday.

 

the report refers to fast/slow scan times, but are the scan times listed? i don't see them

 

The results are not available ATM? I just checked av-comparatives and they're gone

EDIT: they're online now, and the page is updated with entries for 2007 comparatives.

 

The results are there. They are not gone...

 

I´m glad to see that Avira has done well i this latest test. However, I do still hesitate to use it because of its higher rate of FP compared with the other AV products.

Regards, C.

 

if it finds an fp just report it to them...

 

How do you know it´s a FP if you´re not an experienced user to decide which is what? Then it could be to late after you have erased some important files...

Regards, C.

 

Hi Cerxes

You can set antivir to send everything it catches to go to quarantine instead of deleting it. Then from quarantine there's an option to submit it to avira for analysis, you can always restore a file if it is found to be harmless.

Suggers

 

the options i put on laptop was first action repair secound option qurantuine.

 

I've never used AVIRA but any good AV will provide a backup in Quarantine.

 

After reading through all these replies, i'm left with the feeling that Kaspersky performed poorly.lol!. Hey 99% is still awesome.
As much as i respect 'IBK' for his efforts, let's remember that this is only a test.And you must remember that because in 'Real World' situations, 'Norton' doesn't come close to those detection rates, especially with Trojans.