Nod32 detection rates

Go to http://www.av-comparatives.org/ and found out for yourselfs

Not the best, but its okey

 

Go to www.virusbtn.com and see the last 5 years of independant testing from a world leader...

Cheers

 

heh yeah.. but the tests are very diffrent... VB100% only test samples from Wildlist org.

 

Wrong.

To achieve the VB100 award, the AV has to detect 100% of the WL samples with no false positives. However, WL samples are not the only thing tested.

 

yeah but they test only "famous"(or a high risk infection) malwares...

Av-Compratives test all kinds of malwares

 

Hi,

You should not disappoint with these results and as its name says NOD32 is an Anti-virus/worm software not Anti-trojan/other malware. In these results NOD32 is good at virus/worm detection as it should supposed to be. This doesn't mean NOD32 is not good at viruses/worms detection, NOD32 is one of the best at viruses/worms detection as you can see in Virus Bulletin tests.

If you want an Anti-virus software that have a good detection rates not only viruses/worms but good at other malware such as trojans, backdoors, spyware you should consider Kaspersky or McAfee instead of NOD32. You have to know what your Anti-virus software really does not because its advertisement so you can choose what really suits to your needs.

Virus Bulletin, as its name says its test suit mainly focuses on only ITW viruses/worms, Zoo viruses/worms are also tested but may not count and other malware are not included in Virus Bulletin test.

You can not judge the quality of an Anti-virus by only count a number of VB100% logoes but you have to consider other available test results that conduct by other testers too.

 

Have a look to the "overview" page that is under the comparatives. NOD32 has "advance" detection rate of zoo-samples, which the tester (I) calls as "very good". (and an "advanced+" in the retrospective test, which is even better - excellent ).

 

I don't see why there's a distinction between Trojan and Virus detection when it comes to AVs (Yes I know AV stands for Anti-Virus but ROM stands for Read Only Memory and you get rewritable ones these days). They can both have definitions released for them once they've been identified so there's no excuse. You're just as likely if not more so to encounter a trojan these days so AVs that don't target trojans are not acceptable.

Why might it be harder to identify a trojan than a virus. For that matter what's the difference? Haven't the lines been blurred

 

It will never get through my thick skull that 99.9% detection is really the only criteria for selecting which AV to use. Nor can I seem to grasp the obvious point that 94.96% just plain sucks.

Hmmm, which one should I be more concerned with?

That reminds me, I should go downtown (NYC) and get my malaria booster shots.

 

However, from my experence NOD also detects some real world current infections prior to KAV or McAfee.
Example: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=42010
This has occured a number of times.

I run NOD and BOClean on a P4 2.8 machine that is used for gaming.
To me that is a great combination and no noticable effect with the real time protection running on both NOD and BOClean.