AV-Comparatives Results - Nov 2007 Retrospective/ProActive Test

nice one drweb,

39%

only 1% off an advanced+ rating for detection

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

Explain to me how that works because BitDefender only got standard too. Are you sure 40% was the threshold for Advanced+?

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

yep 40% for advanced+, IBK said so.

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

They got knocked down because of FPs.

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

FALSE POSITIVES! please read the report.

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

Eset - 71% with NO FPs, VERY impressive!!

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

yep, as expected.

well ... i expected maybe 1 or 2 fps from them.

still the same problem with drweb, false positives.

35 is too much, but not the highest

and the detection is a good improvement, just 1% from the advanced+ target, 6th place sounds ok.

now they just have to work on their signature detection and false positives.

especially when 18/35 (if i counted correctly) Were SIGNATURE false positives

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

Nod first - the rest nowhere!

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

nod32 is 'expected' to do well on this test, their overrall detection relys on it.

but still, impressive as always for them on this test.


------------
6/7 standard ratings would have scored a higher rating if not for False Positives *sigh*

bit worrying

a 9% increase for drweb, surely this was the .origin detections.

now, we just need to see this same improvement for signature detections

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

Symantec continues its tradition of few FPs. Nice to see its scan speed as 'Fast'.

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

Could'nt agree more, Symantec is nowhere near as bad, as many people still think/says. I'm still using another AV, though

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

Looks like Kaspersky just barely got the Advanced+ @ 40%.

And I continue to be impressed with NOD32's heuristics and low FP. Hopefully the other AV can improve to lowering their FPs.

 

Re: Av-Comparatives Results

very good, the best NOD32 antivirus

 

oh no,

not another 'the best'

 

Good to see KAV got Advanced +!

 

How about some props for AVG AM? Big improvement huh? And what about Avast? No heuristics and it still did an admirable job. Plus I understand the free version of Avast is very close to the Pro, and best or not, I'd feel secure enough with Avast Home. I must say however that both Kaspersky and Nod have stepped up their game.

 

I thought fanboys were supposed to understand each other?

 

LOL, we don't know yet, but it seems to go that way though....Sorry Chris, but DR.Web seems far away still....
By the way, what happened to you and F-Secure? Sorry for being nosy...just courious

Cheers

 

i changed back this morning, i missed the doctor too much

good result for you though, as always for the retro

 

Yet again, avast! surprises with it's results. In a very positive way.
Good job ALWIL. Also congrats to Kaspersky team, they really improved their engine significantly.

 

kaspersky got lucky

kaspersky was only 111 samples over the 40% Advanced+ target.

jammy

 

The Doctor is going up!!!

 

only proactively.

they need to apply the same 9% increase to their signature detection before improvements can be shown nationwide.

319 short of Advanced+ (detection wise) grrr

once again FP's an issue though, but this seems to be the case with many others aswell, i expected a big amount from drweb due to the new technology being tested, hopefully they can fix that in the next 6 months till next and hopefully reach that LITTLE push towards Advanced+ for this retro test.

im sure Drweb will be happy about this, however... they need to work (seriously) on signature detection and sort out the FP's.

are they going to do this?... i dont know.

they have gone very quiet after the MARX test, no replies. .... the word shame comes to my mind, but i HOPE they grab the problem by the balls, and fix it.

 

They need to hire mode Zbodnovs. I think they are just being stubborn/stuck with their policy. If I remember correctly, they don't analyze samples they receive from tests/etc. at all if one single garbage file is found.