Matousec needs some more tests.

For a change at the top:

http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php#products-ratings

 

Like a horse race to see what comes in first, second and third..

 

But where they let the horses swim instead of running

Greetz, Red.

 

Or they let the new horses race the old tired ones.

While their testology may be sound, their rankings are just plain stupid. Hey look, Kaspersky IS2010 beats out G Data IS2008. Good work, Matousec!!

 

Their rankings are indeed completely idiotic and unfair but I'd still pick KIS over G Data any day.

Anyway I see Comodo has paid for a re-test. Let's see how the ranking will shape when all the products get tested.

 

cis ownz! once more u all none comodo lovers got it straight to your brain

now its time to drop all those unjustified paid firewall and switch to free comodo

 

u do realize comodo got themselves retested with a new version (clearly some optimization specific for tests otherwise they wuldnt bother getting a re-test if they TRULY didn't care like they say) while everyone else was still having the same version as the previous test...

 

Good to see, I hope they also implement some tests of CLT.

But I would rather like to see a x64 test

 

I read this yesterday, it makes a lot more sense but it has a way to go yet. I still don't like the money angle that it is possible to pay for a higher score.

 

They pay to test a higher version.

 

Not many people can afford to work for free, or to supply 24/7 bandwith !

 

As the horses are in the starting gate. Get set go around the track in the next test who will win this round of test? Its a sure bet and the odds are 1 to 1 that the higher wage player will win again!

As a side note: I would like to see test perform not on just how well a firewall can hold up, but what its module can do? Can it really protect or just spew out false positives?

 

Quoting your topic not your Sentence

As for needing more tests. I'm sure they can dream some up have some pass and some fail get the ones to fail to pay some money to get retested this would be a change from the current.... O wait!

 

I went back and edited the numbers bold to enlighten my point, reading comprehension problems being what they are here at Wilders. Clue: "higher" numbers are "newer" and (within marketing restraints) pertain to the calendar year.

+1 on the idiotic and unfair. One's preference is irrelevant to this thread; one could pick any "brand new release" (winner!!) vs "way old release" (looser) from Matousec's ranks to make that argument.

 

Would have been nice if Matousec had tested their links. COMODO is *free?* Not according to the link. You've got to give a credit card and pay $39.95 for the trial version, no option at all to get it for free there.

 

Heh. Yeah, I suppose ... I just remember the company motto being "Why do we give this all away for free?" Sorta like that lifetime license for BOClean. But then I'm hoping people line up and buy ... maybe Melih can come up with some of that nearly $6,000 he still owes me.

 

On April 30, 2007 David Blaine was on the Oprah Winfrey show, not just for an interview, but to also make an attempt to break the record for the world's longest breath hold of 16 minutes 32 seconds set by Peter Colat.


That is a long time!!

 

If the companies behind DefenseWall or Online Armor,behaved like Comodo,or if Rabinovich or Nash behaved like Melih, they would have been dismissed as Rogue companies long ago.

 

I think the same. Here the developers of Online Armor - I like OA ! - and DefenseWall are " aggressive " in answering to every critic at their products. I like Defense +, I not always like the Comodo style in advertising their products, but I don't like to see Comodo permanently target practicing.

 

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=255525

Taken under advisement.
It is truly amazing what a den of good lawyers can accomplish.
Ask O.j Simpson

Also ask him if there is not such a concept of "Payday,Someday".

Comodo will trip up,and justice will prevail.

 

SammyJack you said enough to be sue if they really hired fine lawyers for such statements ;-)

 

Folks,

Let's lay off the gratuitous commentary regarding lawyers/etc.. That's basically meaningless posturing from all sides in this discussion and contributes nothing.

Back on topic or thread is closed.

Blue

 

Ok Let's stop about melih too there is no reason to focus on this. Remember that this HIPS was wrongly targeted as adware before.

In my opinion there shouldn't be necessarily any contradiction in aiming 100% in ''tests'' and focusing on ''real protection'' and users feedback. Now i use it for a very long time on one of my computer and so far it does it job ( except the recent flaw in database update). PcTools free Firewall looks fine too according to experimented users. Tests are always based on the past and eventually just failed for weak tools or misconfigured computers.

 

Right you are!

Matousec came along after the days of BOClean and so I'm not personally aware of them, but I remember another questionable "testing operation" that sure did help BOClean's demise. Testing of software is a good thing when it's conducted properly by impartial testers with nothing to gain other than admiration for their work in the public interest.

What's disturbing about this "testing organization" is the blatant "click on the link to buy so WE get paid." It's been quite common in the past among these "pay us to test" (one way or another) operations for the highest bidder to come out ahead in those tests, perhaps be granted "makeup tests" if they don't make the cut the first time, all for the benefit of the testers themselves rather than the public which "trusts" these test results.

What exactly did Matousec use for those tests and what were the exact parameters to ensure that the testing was a real world test? It's not unusual for many of these ad-hoc testers to put together their tests using malware which is specifically chosen from zoos which were never "in the wild" or worse, tests carefully constructed by pre-testing those vendors they want to come out poorly to select their test regime to favor of those vendors who are willing to "affiliate program" them for the fees collected. Seen that too over the years. And anything which is unique is bound to fail a test if it doesn't properly fit the 1980's expectations and pigeonholes. BOClean constantly took it in the ear because it wasn't a file scanner, wasn't a firewall, wasn't HIPS and therefore couldn't be compared to anything else. Our reward for the uniqueness was ending up eaten by COMODO.

But the bottom line here is that by becoming an affiliate of the "winners" and seeking commissions on sales, that certainly raises serious questions for any "test organization." That all said, COMODO does deserve kudos for the improvements they've made in the two years I was with them until they kicked me and BOClean to the curb this past June. Had they listened to my advice when I first came aboard, they would have been here much sooner.

But that's all water under the bridge now. They *did* add BOClean to their AV, and they finally did what I told Melih the first time we met after I was hired - specifically that "white listing" was the only way to win, and that blacklisting was destined to fail. If COMODO does something someday about their internal communications issues, they'll be a formidable Windows security operation. But kudos to them anyway for coming as far as they have despite the "short attention span theater" aspects of their management.

I was never fond of the AV "way" of doing things (which is why BOClean was so unique) and my involvement with COMODO demanding doing more of the same convinced me that Windows is indefensible with 1980's technology with chrome hubcaps on it. So I've personally moved on to a new operating system that Nancy and I started working on between the time we knew BOClean was no longer paying the bills here and prior to joining COMODO. After COMODO, we've returned to that project and I'm grateful that I no longer have to live in Billyworld. Now if only we could get funding to share it with the world, it'd be a happy place for everyone. No AV needed, cannot possibly get infected and it's *not* Linux either. Been using it exclusively here as have a few friends ever since I left COMODO. It's amusing whilst surfing getting warnings from google, "this site might damage your computer" and thrashing the keyboard with "I wanna SEE it, go away! Leave me alone!" Heh.

So there's all my cards on the table, my motivations for what I've said, and my attitude towards the neverending game of 1980's technologies in the 21st century, and all the players therein. Just honks me off after all these years that it's still the same old, same old ... same for the tests. We'd probably be a LOT better off if us coders didn't have to code for TESTS and instead code for the real world. But it's those testers we have to beat, not the criminals. We don't get graded by the malware authors after all. So no sense worrying about them if the testers don't have their stuff.

/rant mode off ... had lots of things bottled up during my "dismissal quiet time." Have plenty more, but not now - I have a headache.

---

edited: fixed random keystrokes

 

Hey Kev

Another question is : Who is ( are ) behind DIFINEX (DIFferent INternet EXperience) Ltd. , the company that bought Matousec That is not clear either !

Off topic : Kev, is your operating system based on BSD, or am I totaly wrong here

Greetz, Red.