AVs having a real impressive day

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by trjam, Jan 30, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    8,947
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Here. Not a good day for zero threats, well unless you are Panda.
     
  2. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753

    Errr... Back to the non zero day tests please, where you can choose your samples wisely and have more encouraging recults (like all fellas get 95+% and we can all be happy). :D

    This test is bad! Bad i tell you! :mad:
     
  3. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,055
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    The reality is, the zero-day threats are more likely than the "zoo" threats that most tests measure. To me, you are only as good as the next zero-day threat that your AV stops. If you look at the data, there is a high enough probability that we are going to get stung the longer we are online. Of course, the veracity of this test (and any other) is the key- and we may not have enough information to make a proper decision as to the validity of the testing matrix.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2008
  4. computer geek

    computer geek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Posts:
    776
    the test is nonsense, and also, how respected is the source?
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2008
  5. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    8,947
    Location:
    North Carolina
  6. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    10,853
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    This is strange test. Panda 99%( no AV can get it for zer day threats).
    Most others at 69 %, all so close.
     
  7. computer geek

    computer geek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Posts:
    776
    i refuse to believe that the stupid megadetection or whatsoever beat antivir, nod32, bitdefender. the top 3 in heuristics...
     
  8. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    chill geek,

    This was for ONE day only.
     
  9. computer geek

    computer geek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Posts:
    776
    i bet you, if panda knew about this, it would be flying over their main page and they would go one about it for a year or so tricking people to buy their product! :(
     
  10. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    are you saying Panda is a bad product in general?

    but this was just ONE DAY, if you look at the last 12 months, Panda scores just 49.78% protection against Zero day.
     
  11. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,055
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Agreed-one of the worst for 12 months. Dr. Web in 3rd place on a yearly basis (96.37%).
     
  12. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i didnt want to mention it :)
     
  13. computer geek

    computer geek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Posts:
    776
    yes, i am saying panda is a bad product in general, this is one day, i know panda generally scores lower, but this is the whole point of marketing, some site promotes them, and its on their front page saying its best and all the others are rubbish. thats what i'm worried about, people don't really get a chance to think.
     
  14. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    well, i actually like Panda so i cant agree fully :)
     
  15. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,055
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Ya I know, but I ain't as tainted as you. :D
     
  16. computer geek

    computer geek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Posts:
    776
    different opinions made the world! :D :D :D
     
  17. Diver

    Diver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,444
    Location:
    Deep Underwater
    Perhaps Panda is worth a look. Somewhere I read they are using behavior based detection. Perhaps that is where the difference is.
     
  18. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Yup, Panda has a behav. blocker/analyzer. The problem with these numbers is that this test (AFAIK) is done on flat file scanning and I have a hard time believing a >95 % detection rate of fresh samples with a signature-based product. OTOH, Panda is a somewhat agressive scanner, so maybe a good amount of detections are of the "suspicious" kind.
     
  19. virtumonde

    virtumonde Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Posts:
    499
    Hi just a little info from my experience.I don't use panda never did,i don't belive in any test even if it's done by the most trusted sources(av-comparatives,virus bulletin etc)i always used avira premium as my main protection.I use p2p quite often mainly to check for malware and warn the others,and when i scan the files that i know are infected using virus total ,panda and prevx are the ones that more often flag 0 day malware.I know that the files are infected (i use sandboxie and process explorer so i'm aware even if avira miss something),i only scan at virus total for my curiosity.You don't have to belive this are just my findings during the last 2-3 months.So even if i don't trust the test i belive it is not far from the truth.
     
  20. larryb52

    larryb52 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Posts:
    1,123
    F-secure is pretty solid on zero day threats...
     
  21. Frisk

    Frisk AV Old-Timer

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Posts:
    31
    Location:
    Iceland
    Hmm... interesting. So, just what is this thing that Panda is reporting as "Adware/AccesMembre", I wonder.
     
  22. jrmhng

    jrmhng Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2007
    Posts:
    1,268
    Location:
    Australia
    Yeps have a look at http://www.shadowserver.org/wiki/pmwiki.php?n=Stats.VirusYearlyStats

    The daily results fluctuate a fair bit. The yearly ones should be better.
     
  23. virtumonde

    virtumonde Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Posts:
    499
    This mont i've found 4 zero day threats that ware only detected by Panda and they ware all flaged as "suspicious".I don't know what system Panda uses for detection but indeed the files ware flagged as "suspicious"
     
  24. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    12 months = 1 year ;)

    ;)

    but thank you :D
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2008
  25. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    eh, that's just a test showing nothing. :)
    Today Panda may be at the top, then Avira, then Kaspersky. It really matters what kind of threats YOU encounter not those honeypots.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.