NOD32 winner best heuristics in this test

A guy at another board reports so many NOD32 misses. I don't know what to say.

http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs32&d=05232&f=noddy1.PNG

http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs32&d=05232&f=noddy2.PNG

http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs32&d=05232&f=noddy3.PNG

http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs32&d=05232&f=noddy4.PNG

 

OT post (a general "stab" attempt at the forum) by "visitor99" has been removed.

#1 - let's stay on topic.
#2 - Issues with the forum can be addressed in private to the admin at any time.

 

I think that its some kind of a chance with NOD, some are lucky and other are not. Not long ago I introduced our neighbour to NOD's world. Yesterday he came, complaining about heavy XP startup and very slow IE (he has all the incredible hulks: MSAS,Sb S&D,SG, SB, adaware etc.). We tried many things finally KAV saved us by its online scanner
http://www.kaspersky.com/beta?product=161744315
although beta but found 5 nasties.

 

Perhaps I should post in the NOD32 forum as no "experts" are replying or perhaps they have no answer. If NOD32 functions by "chance" then I picked the wrong AV - well, I've got Escan free anyway.

 

I believe nod is a pretty fair av, I have tried two different versions and a beta and it just does not run well on my computer at all. But a lot of other people have very good luck with nod. It is just that all software does not run well on all computers, it is just a fact of life. We are lucky we actually have such a wide selection of antivirus to choose from.

bigc

 

The fact that is runs well on my machine is not a factor. The question is why is it missing so many that other AV's seem to pick up? The findings are run at online virus scanners to compare (jotti's I believe).

 

There's some discussion on it here you can read. All I see here, btw, are some downloaders and some couple adware including Purityscan.

 

Jotti's does not have the 'potentially dangerous applications' detection enabled for NOD32, because it runs Linux.

 

Personally, I think that many users of NOD 32 on this forum do more harm to the product than good because too many statements are making out NOD 32 to be an invincible God and raising peoples expectations too much. The thing I notice between NOD 32 users and users of most other AV's is that other AV's stand by their product mainly quoting their experience of not having many infections while a very large percentage of NOD 32 users seem to emphasise the awards more and this causes friction because an AV's true effectiveness is never ever measured by how many awards it wins but by how well it protects the end user's PC.

When I saw people continually referring to awards I jumped on the bandwagon too but soon came down to earth with a rather large thud when quite a few viruses got right through the 'invincible NOD 32'. Then I realised that however nice these awards are, they are not the real test. The real test is how well the program can protect the end user and that's where I found the lack of a huge database was a real weakness of NOD because heuristics have not been developed to a point where they are as infallible as an exact definition and so it misses many viruses & trojans. It's still good to have heuristics but as a backup. However NOD 32's strategy is to have a very light database and rely on heuristics which are not perfect and that is why I got infiltrated I believe. If I had an AV with a huge database of definitions I would have stood a better chance of being protected than relying mainly on heuristics which are not yet perfected. So I agree with heuristics but as a backup not as the main source of protection against threats.

NOD 32 has weaknesses like any other AV and should be accepted as a 'top' AV because it has protected many users from infiltrations but it's not perfect at all and is definitely not head and shoulders above every other AV unless the awards are quoted which are misleading because they do not show the real picture - how many end users were infiltrated and how many were not using NOD 32. I had about 6 infiltrations using NOD and none using Norton, McAfee, Avast Kaspersky etc so I would be one of the statistics showing NOD to be very fallible indeed. Others who have never been infiltrated will add to the positive stats and so on until an average can be made out but awards cannot categorically claim superiority of one AV over another. All it gives people are what many have termed 'bragging rights'. But I truly feel that these awards and too much bragging is putting people off NOD 32 and doing it more harm than good.

I have Kaspersky Pro now and I'm very happy with it because so far it's intercepting everything and keeping my machine clean but I don't feel the need to brag about it. I don't feel that I have to get online and post that it's won this award or that because for me, the most important thing is my PC not how much I can brag about my AV to others. I won't be going online saying things like Kaspersky beat NOD in tests because for me the issue here is to protect my PC not beat NOD 32. The tests & awards mean absoltely nothing to me if the AV doesn't protect me.

I can find many, many awards and tests where my AV has beaten others but bragging means nothing to me. All that is important is that viruses, worms and trojans are not getting through and causing me problems. It demeans an AV when people have to always resort to awards to try and convince others of it's value because the true value is not determined by tests and awards but by how well the AV protects the end user.

Dave

 

I think your statement needs a little perspective Dave, and my reply to you here and here pretty well sums it up.

Blackspear.

 

Interesting link

 

BlackSpear,

All I can honestly say mate is that NOD 32 let me down badly. Although it is not an anti-trojan or firewall it's scanner was unable to detect infections that Bit Defender's online scanner could and that's not anti-trojan ware or a firewall. The gist of all this mate is that it doesn't matter two hoots how many awards an Av has won if it fails to protect my PC. I am not an idiot and I had sufficient protection that NOD should have at least picked up some of these infiltrations during a scan but it was not to be and I found out the ugly, horrible truth that NOD 32 is not necessarily the best AV out there although many will swear by it because of the 26 odd VB awards. If it can't protect my PC mate no amount of awards will ever convince me it is the best.

Dave

 

I agree with worldcitizen. People expect way too much from NOD32 based on overhyped heuristics and VB100% awards. I don't say NOD32 doesn't deserve awards and i also agree that NOD32 has best heuristics on market.
But judging from what i see here, people expect NOD32 to have 110% detection. They expect each and every thing to be detected by AH.
Not gonna happen. Same applies to each and every AV out there.
Kaspersky is king of overall detection and we can all agree it has no real competition (maybe only McAfee),but it certanly lacks good heuristics for current threats. But they pretty much avoid this by providing hourly updates.
Still far from perfect detection (100%).
NOD32 on the other hand doesn't provide as strong generic engine,hourly updates and huge database,but they offer fairly good database and good reaction times backed up with very good heuristics that cover larg part of new malware. Again not near pefect 100% detection. So why bother at all?
Hey,avast! also misses stuff and we don't defend it in any way. We admit that it's not perfect and that it can miss stuff. And same should do users of other AVs. NOD32 can miss stuff,same goes to Kaspersky and all other AVs.
I fact it's really stupid to expect antiviruses to have perfect detection.

 

Noone said tha nod is perfect. Just the users are over-satisfied

Cheers

 

No,the whole thing is overhyped. This has nothing to do with satisfied users.

 

You just have to go to the avast! forum...
I already had problems in there because of the fanatism of some users...
But now it seems better.

However, I'm a user of NOD32 and this AV is my favorite, but I have conscience that NOD32 isn't better in all the areas...
Nothing is perfect.

 

Yeah i hate that too. It's stupid to defend something when it's clear that it's not perfect. Such stupid product defending does more damage than good.

 

The posts are coming from nod users and not from eset staff. So noone can blame the users for expressing their impression about nod 32, even if this bothers

 

And I will repeat, that given I was involved in that thread from early on, that your security was lacking, that TDS supposedly missed this mystery Trojan, this being the case, who knows how you had Nod32 setup, even having ZoneAlarm would have alerted you to outbound traffic. This has been discussed at great length in that thread. Besides all this, I won't throw out the baby with the bath water just because of a single instance, that simply doesn't make sense.

I don't profess that Nod32 catches 100% of everything 100% of the time, and nor do I see that here (given sometimes a newbie gets a little over excited), no anti-virus will do this, it is not plausible to think along such lines, however, through independent and professional testing it is amongst the leaders of the pack.

It is no use sticking ones head in the sand regarding testing, these tests are there to give a guide to those wanting to know in which direction they should head. This is how I came across Nod32 after a previous Anti-virus failed on multiple occasions.

Huge databases, who on earth wants irrelevant and meaningless rubbish detected, Eset have long taken the stance of only catching what actually works and keeping their databases clean.

Cheers

 

Garbage or not,i don't care. If it's just a fragment of malware,what it has to do on my PC? Nothing. So its ok to clean it. Also for users that need pure detection force (those that don't know much about malware and safe hex,but they need secure protection). I also don't know what you consider as garbage. Every malware is garbage for me, so everything should be detected.
Adding only selected range of malware is a bad excuse that i don't accept.

FYI,i'm using NOD32...

 

But the users should try to be more realistic...

 

Well this is the way ALL anti-virus companies are having to head, redeveloping their software to detect viruses, trojans, malware, keyloggers etc etc, long have gone the days were a anti-virus product can only detect viruses...

Cheers

 

Agreed, I have long taken the stance that a layered approach with security is the best method of protection.

Cheers

 

But why running 4 programs simultaneously when single program could do that?