Real-world test on 5 free security products (Windows)

Well it all depends on the product. If it includes an URL blocker then the vendor can add protection for phishing sites that way.

A HTTP scanner and URL blocker is not the same thing.

 

You need a great brain to not get attacked by such thing.

 

I do really like Comodo I think it offers great protection and for free too. I'd use Comodo again in a heartbeat, but for average users it still has a little way to go to be among the best, then again Comodo isn't really aimed at average users.

 

Not really true ... CIS 6 is designed for those averages users ... It's fully automatic ? What do they need more ?

 

Advanced users such as ourselves aren't going to get hit by phishing attacks, but my point is: to be among the best internet security suites you have to be capable of offering protection across the board to all users, which includes web and phishing protection.

 

In my opinion Comodo just isn't for the everyday average Joe at the moment.

 

Here you are right ... When we are speaking of a suite it definitely means that there is a need of a webfilter just like you have pointed out. CIS cannot be really compare to others until they add a great webfilter.

 

I've installed it for months on my friends computers (they are gamers and most of them 0 knownledges besides LOL or CS:S ) and none of them is complaining ... Just like their previous suites (such as ESET or KIS) really silent.

 

I'm not bashing Comodo in anyway just so you know, I think Comodo is great on many levels, I just wish a web filter would be added, but as someone pointed out above Comodo's DNS is getting better so maybe it's just a case waiting for them to put their full plan into action.

 

I don't feel I'm getting the best out of Comodo without changing the default settings so perhaps that's where I'm coming from.

 

For all average users : Just install it and then forget (maybe enable cloud scanning under full scan options but that's all I have done).

 

I might end up using it again soon, but at the moment I'm happy with Kis, although I'm also itching to try Bitdefender. One thing I really like about Comodo is the reg tweak to enable full automatic virtualization.

 

Dragon is based on Chromium (Chrome) and has good antiphishing module.
Opera and OpenDNS are partners and it scores very high.

 

Don't a lot of default routers not allow client side DNS server changes (you have to change it in the router to allow it)? I know with Comcast my router ignores client side DNS server changes. Therefore, even if Comodo changes your client DNS server settings, you will still use Comcast DNS servers.

Or does Comodo Dragon work differently than your client DNS settings and pulls DNS lookups on it own instead of your O/S internet settings?

 

Another crappy home grown test...just 44 URL's I can pick more than that for sure if I browse the places where I Get malware from,Looking at some of links in the picture I can simply say the tester bought the links from Malc0de database at the time of testing and btw he should check his links before testing as malc0de has a lot of false positives

 

Judging by names, they are malware, PSW stealer and things like that ... NO fp here.

 

I also did take a look at the URL's but some of them look suspicious enough to be checked at Virustotal first before testing.

 

Every link involved here is malicious in a way or another. We've used only 44 as testing procedure is time-consuming and for the moment it was enough to get a decent perspective.

By the way, Av-Test confirms Comodo and BitDefender scored almost perfect as our test showed.

 

I have been testing DNS's with a lot of malicious/phish urls and i my results are these:

- Norton DNS and Firefox/Chrome have better antimalware BBDD querys based protection that Comodo DNS and OpenDNS.
- Chrome/Firefox and OpenDNS have better antiphising protection than Comodo and Norton.
- Norton DNS has a lot of malware false detections.
- OpenDNS has antimalware protection that comodo/norton havent it, antimalware protection dont based on malware BBDD querys.

I dont find any reason to use Comodo DNS.

I have been testing OpenDNS Home VIP that doesnt has antimalware BBDD querys based protection like Umbrella.

 

********!! No AV program is 100%

 

44 samples are not meaningful, the "test" is useless.

 

I have been testing new virus against virustotal.com service.

The best antivirus software is Kaspersky clearly.

F-Secure and GData are very good choice too, avira even.

BitDefender have doing a hard marketing campaign showing it as the best antivirus product, but it is not truth.

Avast and Comodo takes a lot of time to detects new virus, sometimes a lot of time are a lot of hours, but a lot of hours is too late and kaspersky dont need a lot of hours. A lot of times Gdata/F-secure/Avira upgrades new firms fastly than Bitdefender and other antivirus like avast, avg, comodo, norton, panda, macfee..... and kaspersky is faster.

Antimalware block sites filter has a lot of false positives on products like BitDefender, it has very high sensitivity and it causes false positives.

I think that Firefox/Chrome antimalware block filter is better solution to do it.

 

Using virustotal to test the effectiveness of AVs will give you meaningless results! All AVs have some proactive components like behaviour blockers, auto sandbox, reputation based systems which are not included in virustotal results.

 

We should bring all the major test results together in one package and chuckle at the variations.

Charts and percentages simply do not muster a lot of confidence in the public.
I have said this before and i am going to say it again,What malware was involved in the tests and what are the realistic chances of coming across this malware.?

 

Wilders also frown on such postings.