Malware Research Group Project #18

The AV/AM test results just out:

http://malwareresearchgroup.com/?page_id=2

 

thanks for the link,it gives some motivation to keep using a certain security app that we are loosing interest in A2square did very good at this(on top)

 

Thanks for heads-up!
Nice test, Avira again is the winner

 

Thanks for posting this.
I see Twister and Comodo are listed.

 

Yes, and they both achieved pretty high scores.

 

Good job, COMODO - you're on your way.

 

excellent result for a-squared!!

 

Remember... they do combine two engines to achieve that result. The same goes for G-DATA. Avira does it on its own.

Just my two cents.

 

I agree. Very respectable result for both.

 

Do testing samples that are four months old really give a decent guide to detections as a lot of the sites serving up those malwares are probably closed down never to be seen again?

How about a couple of rogue samples from yesterday with the first thing these two rogues doing at install is shutdown your resident security and block a lot of other security vendors sites through hosts file entries.

Only one vendor flags this new rogue as suspicious.

And no hits for this fake codec which installs another rogue.

MBAM hits both already.

 

i get redirected to http://malwareresearchgroup.com/graphic.php

 

I too...

 

me too.

but i tried with hidemyass.com i can enter site witjout problem.

 

The link works fine here.

 

Maybe this helps:
http://www.occur.pl/images/0245c46c/dd7cb33a/01b6e7abae.PNG

 

I find it remarkeable that Matt's (remove malware / you tube) exemplaric / random testing with 10 to 20 samples of max one week old, still make AVAST + AVIRA (v(9) miss a roque and AVG even some rootkits, while DriveSentry catched 20 out of 20 (although one was a low risk warning, which was arbitrarely counted as pass by Matt). Same applies to PC Magazine, not a very established testing method, still PCMag found an Avira bug, so that by itself puts some credential on the testing

So it is a mix Avira and A2 always come up high in those broad tests (zoo en wild virusses), but I have no idea what are good AV/AS/AT programs for latest in the wild.

 

DrWeb poor result but i still use it

 

Yes, there's no reason to not if you like it. Use the AV you think is doing the job of removal and suiting your needs - acting good. It's a technology of yesterday, so it's only used for some kind of signature-removal of known malware.

 

Nice to see Comodo getting a higher detection rate then in the previous test. eScan is getting some good results, did anybody try this program?

 

I trialed eScan quite a few years ago. Back then it was using a Kaspersky engine. It wasn't a bad program. It seemed a little pricey though.

 

Same here.

I've used proxy : proxy-service.de

http://www.proxy-service.de/browse....2VhcmNo/Z3JvdXAu/Y29tLz9w/YWdlX2lk/PTI_3D/b1/

 

It's all good and in fact not so different than AV-comparative's results but the difference is they take false positives into account.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews/main-tests

Now I understand FPs are not that troublesome unless they are some important system files but they do matter...

 

Yes False Positives are dangerous if they are mistaken with system files, but most of the time FP's are not a big deal, most of them are keygens and cracks (most not all)