BugBopper Challenges the Competition

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by BugBopperGuy, Sep 4, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BugBopperGuy
    Offline

    BugBopperGuy Registered Member

    BugBopper has issued three different scanner challenges to Wilders Members: size, speed, and detection rate.

    The Size Challenge. Today's bloated scanners take up to 293 Mb on disk, with the average scanner product in one study requiring 75 Mb. We believe that BugBopper has the smallest footprint on disk of any scanner.
    • BugBopper's unique and innovative scanning method greatly reduces both program size and detection database size, while speeding the scanning process and reducing CPU utilization. Once the first full scan of any machine is completed, BugBopper re-scans at blinding speed, on many machines up to thousands of files per second, allowing a full scan to be completed in a minute or two. What's more, the initial download of "signatures", though only 6 MB or so, typically shrinks to less than 200K after the first full scan.
    • To win this challenge, simply measure the size of your current scanner on disk, and measure the size of BugBopper on disk after your first scan with BugBopper has completed. Send your findings and comments to Contest@BugBopper.com. If BugBopper is not the smallest, you'll win a free one-year license, or we'll extend your paid license for another year.

    The Speed Challenge. A typical scanner can take hours to do a thorough scan of your machine. We believe that BugBopper is the fastest scanner on the market, even in its most thorough mode, often scanning at over 3,000 files per second.
    • To win this challenge, scan your machine with BugBopper once. Now scan with your favorite scanner, using equivalent settings, and time and record your results. Now scan again with BugBopper, and time and record your results. Send your findings and comments to Contest@BugBopper.com. If BugBopper's second scan is not the fastest, you'll win a free one-year license, or we'll extend your paid license for another year.
    The Detection Challenge. The average scanner detects just 62% of malware files in large collections. In your machine, the percentage is probably the same, because scanners identify what they know to be malware, and ignore files they do not know anything about. BugBopper's approach is to suspect files it has not seen, and send them to our lab for instant analysis. As a result, BugBopper's detection rate is higher than any other product. It is the only product, in fact, that can detect and name the 17,000 malware executables that began appearing today.
    • Here's something for the malware collectors on the Wilders Security Forums. To win this challenge, you'll need to extract your malware collection from whatever archives you use, as BugBopper does not scan inside archives (since only the extracted programs present actual risk). Scan what you've extracted with BugBopper once. (If anything is new to BugBopper, it will be rushed off to our lab for analysis). Now scan with your favorite scanner, using equivalent settings, and record your results. Now scan again with BugBopper (analysis of those uploaded files will now be complete), and record your results. Send your findings and comments to Contest@BugBopper.com. If BugBopper does not have the highest detection rate, you'll win a free one-year license, or we'll extend your paid license for another year.
    When you write, be sure to include the name and version of the other scanner. Results will be posted at BugBopper.com. And I hope there will be some discussion of these outrageous claims here.:cautious:
  2. kjdemuth
    Offline

    kjdemuth Registered Member

    Does that include FP vs actual detections?
  3. Ibrad
    Offline

    Ibrad Registered Member

    Oh I like contests since Bugbopper has to have a license can we use Wuzzup to measure the scan speed?
  4. sg09
    Offline

    sg09 Registered Member

    Good one...;)
  5. lordraiden
    Offline

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Nice contest.

    Is this going to be the killer of the on demand scanners? xD

    I wonder why is not possible to see which files are being uploaded, what they need to hide?

    Edit: A scan need to upload 1.2 GB of files and you cant see wich files are being uploaded... no thanks!

    Seems that they use all this scanner to determine if the file is safe or not, is similar to hitman pro

    Scanner Results

    Scanner Results

    AVG Dirty Dropper.Generic2.FAN
    Norman Clean -
    CA Clean -
    ClamWin Clean -
    VirusBuster Clean -
    ESET Dirty Win32/HackTool.Patcher.A application
    Quick Heal Clean -
    Sunbelt Clean -
    Final result Dirty Win32/HackTool.Patcher.A application
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2010
  6. CloneRanger
    Offline

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    I installed Wuzzup instead of BugBopper, as your www said it's exactly the same, apart from malware deletion.

    Here's a contender comparison. Setup_Wuzzup.exe = 2.81 MB - prevxcsifree.exe = 928 KB

    mem.gif

    wup.gif

    Gave up as the upload completion time was already over an hour away, and it hadn't even hit all my malware folders yet :D Plus all the other normal but not so well known files/programs etc. Goodness knows how long that would have taken, or how much bandwith :eek:

    The 9 finds are files i'm aware of, but not running or infecting ;)

    I'm NOT saying BugBopper/Wuzzup are **** because i don't believe they are, just posting my observations.
  7. BugBopperGuy
    Offline

    BugBopperGuy Registered Member

    You can make your own rules here, and you can be the judge of the results, and whether you should get a free license.

    The best challenge for detections would be to take a vast collection of genuine malware, and see how much each product detects. The best challenge for false alarms might be to take a vast collection of things that were packed non-malware, and see what the products have to say.

    I don't think BugBopper has any false alarms if you use our recommended confidence level of 30% as your cutoff.

    If you use a large collection, it is very likely that it will contain some files that we've never seen. On the first pass, BugBopper will upload them for analysis, but won't pronounce them good or bad. A few minutes later (usually) you can scan again, and it will have names for all the bad stuff.

    But I'd love to hear about the test(s) you devise, and your results. One of us will be surprised.
  8. BugBopperGuy
    Offline

    BugBopperGuy Registered Member

    Yup. They should have identical scan speeds.

    Also: you don't need a license to scan with BugBopper -- just to quarantine and remove.
  9. BugBopperGuy
    Offline

    BugBopperGuy Registered Member

    I'm looking forward to hearing your report!
  10. Ibrad
    Offline

    Ibrad Registered Member

    How long do we have to do this? Will it be open for a few days so I can do this on Monday because my slow internet speed which mean it may take a while to upload files to the BugBopper cloud.
  11. BugBopperGuy
    Offline

    BugBopperGuy Registered Member

    We didn't mean to hide anything at all. I was trying to avoid clutter and excess detail.

    I would be happy to work out a proposal for a change in BugBopper to display the list of suspect executables we are uploading. But would that not be sufficient -- would you want to be able to review the list first, and only allow certain files to be uploaded?
  12. BugBopperGuy
    Offline

    BugBopperGuy Registered Member

    Absolutely. Take all week if you want.
  13. lordraiden
    Offline

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Take a look to the interface of Comodo Cloud scanner, and copy it.
    http://forums.comodo.com/news-annou...-cloud-scanner-20-final-release-t60041.0.html

    Where I can modify the kind of file that are going to be uploaded? Anyway I think that the user need to know about every single file uploaded and the veredict of your scanner.
  14. BugBopperGuy
    Offline

    BugBopperGuy Registered Member

    You may have won. Can you suggest a download link that works? (Google seems to be directing me to dysfunctional sites), I'll give this a try.

    The time penalty of any scanner accumulates over your uses of that scanner. If your favorite scanner takes 2 hours with each scan, and you scan 20 times a year, your cost is 40 hours. With BugBopper, your first scan, including upload times, might be 2 hours or more... but subsequent scans will usually take just a few minutes. With 20 BugBopper scans a year, your costs are so low you'll be able to afford to scan more often.

    I think it is worth doing one complete scan, then scanning again to see how long it takes this time.
  15. lordraiden
    Offline

    lordraiden Registered Member

    www.prevx.com/facebook
  16. CloneRanger
    Offline

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    @ BugBopperGuy

    Prevx 3 - http://info.prevx.com/downloadprevx.asp

    The link lordraiden gave is for PSOL which is different to the one i quoted.

    I may try another scan at some point, but not right now ;)
  17. lordraiden
    Offline

    lordraiden Registered Member

    The scann time btw the free version and the paid one of prevx must be the same.
    And as far as I know prevx does not have any way to trial their paid products.
  18. CloneRanger
    Offline

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    @ lordraiden

    Hi,

    Prevx 3 is free, unless you register and turn it into a paid version. The only difference is the free won't clean up everything, but it will detect both statically and dynamically exactly the same malware it finds.

    Same difference between Wuzzup and BugBopper.

    Facebook PSOL is not the same as Prevx 3.
  19. acr1965
    Offline

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Are results of scans going to be posted here? I thought MDL would send a test bed of zero day malware upon request- like 1,100 malwares. Can anyone confirm this?

    Also, what about a real time detection challenge in addition to the on demand scan?
  20. andylau
    Online

    andylau Registered Member

    Why do a scan with BugBopper will make its size smaller?:D
  21. sg09
    Offline

    sg09 Registered Member

    Thank you...:) But I doubt if I could do any test now as I am very much busy this days...:'(
    Anyway I have no doubt that Bugbopper will win in most cases... All the best to it...:)
    And to all guys, don't forget to scan with all extensions during detection tests.
  22. BugBopperGuy
    Offline

    BugBopperGuy Registered Member

    Not sure I've done what you were expecting. I just installed the free Prevx, and on disk it looks 2 Mb bigger than BugBopper:

    Prevx.exe: 6,394,368 bytes.

    BugBopper directory, including BugBopper.exe: 3,414,421 bytes.
    Wuzzup.db (scan strings for BugBopper): 687,104 (size varies)
    Total size for BugBopper directory+database: 4,101,525.

    Looks to me like BugBopper is 2/3 the size of Prevx. Did I get this wrong?
  23. BugBopperGuy
    Offline

    BugBopperGuy Registered Member

    Who is MDL?

    We'll have real-time soon, but don't have it now, so everyone else wins.
  24. Ibrad
    Offline

    Ibrad Registered Member

    MDL + Malware Domains List :)
  25. buckslayr
    Offline

    buckslayr Registered Member

    So bugbopper will be a complete solution when you add realtime protection or will it be more similar to mbam?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.