So a-squared is really light and has Mamutu too, but...

looking at the Ikarus results at the Virus Bulletin doesn't give me a lot of confidence. It has basically flunked the wild list, on every platform, every time it's been tested. What gives?

 

You're only looking at one test. Avira failed as well and they have an excellent detection rating. Also that is just the Ikarus engine only, not the A2 mal-ware and mamatu. When you put it all together its a tight little package. I just dropped KIS for A2 and OA paid. THat took alot of doubt because I've always had kaspersky running in some form. I still go to on-line scanners and antispyware programs to make sure that it doesn't miss anything. I have no been disappointed yet. That and my laptop is more responsive with only one AV running.

 

Hello, could I ask you something as I also used this combo for a while. But in my case, with Online Arnor installed (even if stopped), the A-Squared on-execution scanner was not working - it didn't detect Trojan Simulator nor EICAR on execution. After I uninstalled Online Armor everything was fine. Could you check that on your computer. Mine is running XP SP3.
Thank you in advance.

 

That is kind of weird behaviour
I have used same combo (A2 and OA paid) with same set up(XP SP3) but This wasn't the problem.
EICAR file will be flagged as Test Virus just after your download is complete.

 

That shouldn't be possible as A-Squared doesn't have on access scanner, only on execution. So it only detects once a file is started.

 

I wouldn't be concerned about Virus Bulletin tests.
False positives are likely the reason for Ikarus' bad showing.

 

Test are good they show you different things about a product, but I would never take one test and base all my findings on it. You need to see a AV as a whole not just on one thing, look up other tests you will be surprised how most products differ in different places.

I rely more on my own experience and my own findings then I do on tests.


Edited..
typo's

 

using A2 and im very happy with it, detection is phenomenal as well.

 

False positives can be just as bad as malware to those not technically inclined. As good a reason as any to steer clear.

 

Guess the amount of FP's could cause problems. All programs half false positive I guess you just have to figure out what is the right number for you.

 

lol if u were to ask average people on street how many of them wuld have a CLUE what A-Squared was? probly next to none, thats why im pretty sure people using it are at least reasonably technically inclined since i cant imagine an IT guy installing A2 on a completely inexperienced users PC either...

 

I would have normally agreed with you, as that is pretty common from their tests, but it's flunking because of wild list failures and that is what caught my eye. Am I allowed to post a screenshot from over there?

 

Prob posting a Direct link to it would be safer.

 

You have to login, that's the problem and I'm thinking Wilders will delete a screenshot because VB stuff is like copyrighted or something! What's the big secret, you know?

 

I'm pretty certain that Wilders will delete a screenshot depicting the VB100 results as per that site's TOC.The thing is you need to be registered there to view those results so their hands are tied.

There have been positive test reviews on A2AM to balance it out,AVTest did one for the German COM magazine and it was by Protectstar too :


http://www.protectstar-testlab.org/content/site/dateien/1011test-emsi-a-squared_en.pdf

 

Failure reason: 3759 wildlist misses, 4 false positives.

MHO 3759 wildlist misses is difficult to fathom.

 

That's because they have tested with a massive amount of 2 replicated Virut samples that Ikarus was not able to catch with a generic signature at the test time.

For more real world test results by several testing agencies, please see www.anti-malware-reviews.com

 

I got a free license for A2 on 11/11 and was considering installing it on my wife's laptop. I have not used A2 other than as an on-demand scanner so I am not sure how friendly it is to someone like my wife who responds yes to any question. Would this be a bad idea? She currently has DefenseWall (trial) and Avast free and this setup works great for her but if I can keep her PC protected for free that would be great.

 

Ok that would make my Jaw drop, especially how old most of that malware is. But then again VB100 has been just a marketing tool as of late and not really consisted by most as a "Valid" test.

 

Well you've definitely convinced me! Anyway, I have to say it is absolutely perfect on an XP SP3 desktop!

 

Since I am more nearly an average user than most/all others here FP are important to me. I used A-squared in the past and removed it as a result of FP. I have the free license, and will put it on after I try the Avast 5.

I do not base my final decisions on only one test, but when it is all said and done AV Comkparatives is the one I do trust most. So I will be interested in the results that come from those tests in the future.

I guess I will say again, no test that shows a favorite in a bad light is a valid test. I also do not have the expertise to test applications myself as some usually post.

Results such as "3759 wildlist misses, 4 false positives" do not provide much confidence. I don't care whose test they are, that is a dismal result.


Regards,
Jerry

 

Depends on how she surfs the net. A-Squared will notify if visited some malicious site. In all its a very good product give it a shot I bet it won't disappoint you.

 

Thanks for the explanation Christian.

And about posting screenshots from VB, I'm pretty sure that the TOS doesn't allow it.

 

well in my entire time using A2, i only had 2 FP's and these wer pretty strange programs so its understandable. the only thing IMO that wuld make it the most unfriendly to common users is the IDS which culd be potentially confusing for some, although if u choose "intelligent alert reduction" that might not be the case, but i keep that off so im not sure.

 

Virut is definately ITW and the VB test of it is even too tame because they didn't use the very latest versions of Virut. If they would, many AV programs would fail the test horribly. I am looking forward for VB to change that and put up the heat a bit. VB is slowly but surely improving their testing methods. I think the test is slowly getting interesting and relevant again, the RAP test is informative, for example.