New VirusP AV-test 5-2003!

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Firefighter, May 19, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 2 of 3
  1. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    To Xor from Firefighter!

    Because I am the last to be a russian and not even a programer, could you "translate" that to me, Please! :D ;)


    "The truth is out there, but it hurts!"

    Besty Regards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Firefighter, May 23, 2003
    #26
  2. JacK

    JacK Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Posts:
    737
    Location:
    Belgium -Li?ge
    Hello,

    I have tried Pest Patrol about 1 year ago.

    Let's say it'a an anti-malwares and NO antivirus.

    It detects spywares, trojans, backdoors and a lot of other stuffs, like bruteforce dictionnaries, keyloggers, etc... Gave to many false positive one year ago. I have no opinion whether it's improoved.
    It may be bought in a bundle with ZA.

    Rgds,
     
    JacK, May 23, 2003
    #27
  3. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    To Jack from Firefighter!

    Did you mean, that Pest Patrol and Digital Patrol are the same?

    In my mind they are totally different products as you see from those VirusP 5-2003 test results! :D


    "The truth is out there, but it hurts!"

    Best Redards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Firefighter, May 23, 2003
    #28
  4. JacK

    JacK Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Posts:
    737
    Location:
    Belgium -Li?ge
    :

    Hello FF,

    My apologies : you are right of course, I am getting old and did not pay enough attention : I focused on "Patrol" only :'(

    So sorry,
     
    JacK, May 23, 2003
    #29
  5. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    To Firefighter from Technodrome!


    What statement? :)



    Technodrome
     
    Technodrome, May 23, 2003
    #30
  6. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    To Technodrome from Firefighter!

    Never mind, I thought you said Digital Patrol as an AntiVirus! :rolleyes:


    Best Regards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Firefighter, May 23, 2003
    #31
  7. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    Technodrome, May 23, 2003
    #32
  8. xor

    xor Guest

    Êðàñèâûå êàðòèíêè òû çäåñü âûâåñèë, âûãëÿäÿò î÷åíü ïðèòÿãèâàþùå ROFL! :D :D :D
     
    xor, May 23, 2003
    #33
  9. Patrice

    Patrice Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Posts:
    571
    Location:
    Antarctica
    :D LOL! xor, that was a good one! :D LOL
     
    Patrice, May 23, 2003
    #34
  10. VirusP

    VirusP Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2003
    Posts:
    22
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    Lemme explain. I said i used 4 programs to make the vx database, meaning that i got samples some-or-all of them detect.

    As for your proposal to put every sample into a category according to its danger, well, i don't think that's ever gonna be possible. Danger may vary due to different platforms and conditions. Added to this, danger is usually a synonym to the number of infected machines which also varies.

    About AT's, i have always got a poor opinion on them, just because they cannot protect a computer without having an AV installed as well. And this is not acceptable for me. It never had to do with their performance at any AV test.

    I cannot use more than 6-7 AV programs to make the vx database because NO OTHER AV report file is useful to me, due to file formating. I wish other AV had the same report file formating as KAV, RAV, MCAFEE, NOD, DRWEB, SOPHOS, FPROT do.

    Regards
     
    VirusP, May 24, 2003
    #35
  11. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    To everyone from Firefighter!

    Lets's take a little of brake! If eveone is going to pick those programs off that has Kaspersky, F-prot, McAfee or RAV engine, so the results are so good as you never can think!

    After that, there is no chance to some arques!

    "The truth, is out there, but it hurts!"

    Best Regards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Firefighter, May 24, 2003
    #36
  12. solarpowered candle

    solarpowered candle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    1,181
    Location:
    new zealand
    Im still trying to suss this out . Does Digital patrol also scan for virus as well as trojon and wormz and malware . (similar to say Kav Lite )
     
    solarpowered candle, May 24, 2003
    #37
  13. VirusP

    VirusP Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2003
    Posts:
    22
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    Here are the updated results including GAV 4.

    Rank

    1. F-Secure version 5.40 - 99.67%
    2. Kaspersky version 4.0.5.37 - 99.55%
    3. e-Scan Pro version 2.5.181.5 - 97.66%
    4. McAfee version 7.00.5000 - 97.14%
    5. RAV version 8.6.104 - 95.18%
    6. F-Prot version 3.13 - 92.92%
    7. PC-Cillin version 2003 10.01.1039 - 90.59%
    8. Norton version 2003 Professional - 90.01%
    9. Sophos Sweep version 3.69 - 89.37%
    10. Dr. Web version 4.29c - 89.23%
    11. Panda Titanium version 2.04.04 - 88.75%
    12. Command version 4.75.0 - 87.09%
    13. Avast version 4.0.202 - 86.85%
    14. BullGuard version 3.5 - 84.68%
    15. BitDefender version 6.4.3 - 83.26%
    16. AntiVir version 6.19.09.60 - 79.31%
    17. Vexira version 2.06.00.01 - 78.48%
    18. Norman version 5.50 - 75.32%
    19. NodIce version 1.405 - 74.29%
    20. Solo version 2.5 - 73.98%
    21. Fire version 2.7 - 73.98%
    22. AVG version 6.0.478 - 66.85%
    23. E-Trust version 6.1.4.0 - 63.08%
    24. Ikarus version 5.05 - 62.44%
    25. VirusBuster version 10.00.88928 - 60.16%
    26. Protector Plus version 7.2.E01 - 53.65%
    27. ViRobot Expert version 4.0 - 49.80%
    *** Gladiator version 4.0.3 - 48.62% *** (The updated version of GAV was tested after GAV's team kind request)
    28. V3Pro Deluxe version SP2 - 45.69%
    29. Gladiator version 3.5.0 - 41.29%
    30. VirScan Plus version 12.784 - 40.42%
    31. RHVBS version 3.95.487 - 37.79%
    32. Quick Heal version 6.09 - 33.66%
    33. Digital Patrol version 4.0.65 - 28.87%
    34. Wave version 2.0 - 24.27%
    35. VirusBuster II version ? - CRASHED
    36. PestPatrol version 4.2.0.33 - 12.38%
    37. TDS version 3.2.0 - 11.77%
    38. AntiTrojan Shield version 1.0.0.16 - 10.10%
    39. PC Door Guard version 3.0.0.6 - 9.16%
    40. Trojan Remover version 5.0.3 - 7.85%
    41. Anti Trojan version 5.5.408 - 7.04%
    42. Tauscan version 1.6.0723 - 4.06%
    43. The Cleaner version 3.5.3517 - 3.77%
    44. Hacker Eliminator (former LockDown Millenium) version 1.2 - 3.56%
    45. Trojan Hunter version 3.5.707 - 1.82%
    46. IP Armor version 5.40.0112 - 1.37%
     
    VirusP, May 25, 2003
    #38
  14. root

    root Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Posts:
    1,723
    Location:
    Missouri, USA
    Thanks VirusP for posting this. Can we have a link to the information on this test, please?
    I am curious as to why DrWeb scores as low as it does. Your test results are not out of line with other similar tests, so I do not doubt your tests, just wondering where DrWeb is weak so I can jump on the coders there and get them to fix the shortcomings.
     
    root, May 25, 2003
    #39
  15. wizard

    wizard Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    818
    Location:
    Europe - Germany - Duesseldorf
    DrWeb's databases have less zoo malware signatures included as KAV for example. IMHO nothing to worry about. :)

    wizard
     
    wizard, May 25, 2003
    #40
  16. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    DrWeb's results from VirusP test

    [table][td]File (136)

    MS-DOS (22816)

    Windows.* (170:cool:

    Macro (5982)

    Malware (7752)

    Script (345:cool:

    Trojans-Backdoors (8943)

    Total (50795)

    [/td][td]94
    69.12%
    21887
    95.93%
    1419
    83.08%
    5868
    98.09%
    6890
    88.88%
    3086
    89.24%
    6081
    68.00%
    45325
    89.23%
    [/td][/table]

    According to this test DrWeb's weak spots are trojans and backdoors. Anyways DrWeb needs zoo improvments as well.



    Technodrome
     
    Technodrome, May 25, 2003
    #41
  17. xor

    xor Guest

    Because they are including clients, editservers, servers this is not the best result in trojans for drweb.
     
    xor, May 25, 2003
    #42
  18. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    I know. Thats why I said according to this test. ;)

    DrWeb has pretty good protection against trojans and backdoors(Especially Heuristics part.)


    Technodrome
     
    Technodrome, May 25, 2003
    #43
  19. xor

    xor Guest

    yes heuristic is good - sometimes to good :D
    And you can of course only create heuristic for the servers - this means this testset does include a lot of clients - this explains also why GAV 4 Heuristic does not better score well at least 500 more detections in Trojans than 2 weeks before :eek:

    Overall i am happy with this 8% improving in 2 weeks. Next to weeks is the goal to score 100% with Win32 Viruses and Trojans 100% i am already including here as hell :D
     
    xor, May 25, 2003
    #44
  20. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    Good work there. ;) But what is going to happen in one year? You're going to detect human viruses too.LOL :D

    Thhshs....So you cut your sleeping time again. :D



    Technodrome
     
    Technodrome, May 25, 2003
    #45
  21. xor

    xor Guest

    I did never claim to have this :D
     
    xor, May 25, 2003
    #46
  22. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    :D :D :D



    Technodrome
     
    Technodrome, May 25, 2003
    #47
  23. root

    root Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Posts:
    1,723
    Location:
    Missouri, USA
    Thanks for the info guys. ;)
     
    root, May 25, 2003
    #48
  24. Douglas

    Douglas Guest

    I was wondering why dedicated AT programs such as TDS and Trojan Hunter are included in an all-around malware test. Is this standard in testing?

    Regards,
    Douglas
     
    Douglas, May 25, 2003
    #49
  25. VirusP

    VirusP Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2003
    Posts:
    22
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    This is the link to the new test.
    http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=59&mnu=59

    The full results are here
    http://www.virus.gr/fullxml/redirect.asp?id=159&type=dw
     
    VirusP, May 25, 2003
    #50
Page 2 of 3
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Accept Learn More...