MSE Missed 100% Of Malware In This Test

Might be a new low?

http://www.cso.com.au/article/563978/security-tools-missing-up-100-malware-ethreatz-testing-shows/

 

Kaspersky Koolaid scoring really low in 'real' action eh? Trend, ESET, Norton right on top. Many of us have said all along that MSE is as good as useless, nothing more.

**copyright restricted image removed**

 

MSE is only as good as the user..These "tests" are utter garbage.

 

MSE is utter garbage. Most of the infected machines we deal with - are running MSE. It's tragic.. I just dealt with a Cryptolocker3 on Friday, he was littered with Malware, and of course - MSE was on there. What I find sad is people still put faith in MSE, and some incompetant IT people still deploy it.

 

Panda is doing a great job, best free antivirus in my opinion.

ESET, Panda and Norton on top.

Kaspersky was way better than Trend Micro in this test.


Trend Micro only did good in January 2015, the rest was pretty mediocre.

 

I don't understand why..MS keeps putting this garbage out, don't they know it's crap and don't protect squat!!

 

Panda did good on the Test. That must not be with the free version. If it was then i would install it and run it with WSA.

 

It stated "Panda Security for Business" so I would take it as PAID not free.

 

Panda free uses the same engine as the paid consumer product (XMT engine), same protection, the difference is about firewall/Wi Fi Monitor/Backup etc ...
Panda Security for business uses the same cloud infrastructure, the protection should be at the same level.


http://www.pandasecurity.com/mediac...loud-antivirus-free-now-panda-free-antivirus/

 

Panda blocked 64 percent of the malicious downloads, 51 percent at the URL level and 13 percent by eliminating the downloaded file. That's the second best score for an antivirus since I began this test.....http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2463592,00.asp

 

So looking at the July - Dec averages, ESET wins.

ESET 96% 87% 90% 93% 81% 69% 86%
Symantec 32% 79% 81% 91% 95% 88% 78%
Trend Micro % 8% 75% 35% 59% 39% 37%
Kapersky 42% 66% 74% 49% 88% 55% 63%
McAfee 74% 26% 68% 37% 30% 22% 43%
Sophos 12% 19% 66% 17% 95% 25% 39%
Microsoft 0% 1% 55% 6% 7% 4% 12%

ESET always wins this one too.
https://threatcenter.crdf.fr/?Stats

I usually don't take ESET too seriously.

Maybe ESET is better than I realized..

The new Trend is better than the earlier version, so the Trend scores will probably go up over time.

 

ESET is good, but I find it too heavy to run, it lags the entire system. Symantec is a consistent player in that test. Trend, they were likely playing with the versions prior to 2015, so I would expect that to drive to the top pretty quickly. I run Sophos Endpoint Security now, but only because it is centrally managed from the UTM, and now includes Avira's detection engine as a dual scanner.

Also - Frank, Threatcenter isn't factoring the 'varied' capabilities of products, that's raw scanning potential. We know products like Norton and Trend will score lower, that's because they rely on varied technologies working together. Also, Fortinet will always score lower on those because Fortinet SHOULD leverage the IPS of an installed Fortigate Appliance, and these tests are only testing the free dumb-client.

 

I never take much notice of these 'tests'. I've been running MSE for four years on Win 7 and haven't been infected yet. Mind you, I have MBAM and SAS on-demand.

 

time to go play the lottery.

 

LOL

 

Make sure you click on this link in article since is explains their testing: http://www.cso.com.au/article/398860/ethreatz_automated_malware_testing/

They only test for malware arriving via HTTP communication. This would explain MSE's poor performance since it's a given its real time protection sucks.

-EDIT- Overall, this might be a good benchmark for evaluating the web filters in the products tested. Obviously malware can arrive from other sources other than the Internet.

 

I think the test is valid because they actually run the file, so it is a dynamic protection test.

 

True enough.

MSE & SAS add up to a lot of lines of code that do very little. At least you have MBAM as something 'real' in your setup.

Agree.

But with the limitations of assessing only one aspect of the product and the super-low number of samples tested per month, one needs to take the test for what it is. But.... It's another data point.


~ Removed Off Topic Remarks ~

 

LOL.. So true.. Lots of code. For nothing..

 

Here's a link to a Dennis Labs report that tested the same business products: http://www.dennistechnologylabs.com/reports/s/a-m/2014/DTL_2014_Q4_SMB.1.01.pdf . Trend also scored poorly in that test.

Appears Symantec has beefed up it's web filtering in SEP which was sub-standard in its early versions.

 

Touché

 

97% is poo

97% protection is poor?!?!? Dennis is a joke, and uses graphics to mislead. Raw protection, the difference between the top and lower tiers is less than 3%.. He makes it look like there is a 'gigantic' difference.

Also note, Worry Free is 3 years behind Trend 2015 in development cycle (tech wise), none of the new 'tech' is even in Worry Free right now. You probably won't see the new stuff until Worry Free 12. But there is a reason Trend is the biggest player in enterprise - consistency. Kaspersky has never been able to gain a foothold in the corporate market, and now is focused exclusively on SMB. Kaspersky also closed down their SaaS division due to lack of interest.

 

At least.

 

SEP 12.1.1 & 12.1.2 were pretty bad. Lots of conflicts with other products. Firewall issues.

At SEP 12.1.3 now through SEP 12.1.5, things are good. But these are all SEP Enterprise nomenclatures.

Note that DTL is testing the Symantec Product for Small Business rather than the Enterprise product. The Small Business products is the last to get upgrades.

Symantec has stated that moving from the Symantec Enterprise product to the Symantec Small Business product is considered a downgrade.

 

I thought Symantec was the biggest.

It's been a year or so, but I was in a brief where they stated they were the biggest -- but there would be many ways to measure that I suppose.