Test of AV's for the detection of contemporary polymorphous viruses

Original webpage:
http://www.anti-malware.ru/

Babelfish translated

Testintroducion:
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babe...are.ru/index.phtml?part=news&newsid=513&arc=0

Results of the test of antiviruses for the detection of the contemporary polymorphous viruses:
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babe...re.ru/index.phtml?part=tests&test=polymorphic

 

yep, another decent score for drweb.

silver is v.respectable,

whats interests me is, symantec and nod32 which usually get the 12 out of 12, didnt even better drweb.

all tests are different i suppose.

i aint surprised with the 3 gold awarded av's, as they are the ones with the high detections, so as-expected results.

but drweb impresses me further by still getting the silver with only a so-called 89% and 83% detection rates.

 

Avira v Kaspersky ( F-secure, GDATA ) who win? . For me winner is the best antivirus on this planet.

 

Amusing

 

Avira AntiVir Classic is definitely impressive. All I can say is WOW...and it's free.

 

Avira is rocking these dayz

 

Very interesting

 

Very good results for Kaspersky.
As always on top.

 

Avira, leading the way

 

Well, mcafee isn't top of the list, but the results show it has a balanced detection. Satisfied.

 

As it does most of the time...

 

well, i dont think it would for such things as removal, self protection, packer support etc.

there are many tests that 'could be done' and in all honestly, its only kaspersky who score high on them all, so if you rely purely on tests, kaspersky would easily be #1.

regards to this test, avira/kaspersky were expected to score high on this due to the high detections anyway, its simple mathematics, however... the ones to dissappoint are the top-tier-detections who score quite poorly, same goes for the ones who impress who are supposed to be 2nd-tier-detections who score well. etc.

 

Back to Dr. Web, btw. I won't use Kaspersky because of a number of things, and really think the anti-spam module in Dr. Web is unsurpassed even though my ISP filters spam. I am getting a record amount of same, and Dr. Web gets at least 97% of it.

Avira may have better detection, but there are trade-offs with everything, and I like the good Dr. overall.

 

Only trade off for me with avira is the fp's when heuristics are set to high. Other then that it has excellent detection, fast scanning speed and its light. Great AV.

 

I alternate between Dr. Web and Avira. I have never had a fp with Avira, contrary to what others have experienced.

 

Whats interesting to me is that AVG seems to have put up a much better show than it did in previous AV-comparatives tests of polymorphic virus detection. Its a little bit strange, but AVG did claim improvements to polymorphic detection with every program update of AVG 7.5....

 

Avira takes yet another blue. Ho-hum.

But I marvel at how well Avast did. Unexpectedly splendid!

 

yes avast did great

 

Trend Micro looked pretty good. I guess that is one everybody loves to hate.

This forum is generating into an AV fan boy cheering section. You know, its only a computer program with either a free or modestly priced annual subscription, so why all the dedication and expressions of love and loyalty?

 

Because as I have contended several times, there are likely a number of shills (hidden agenda promoters) for the AV they are fanboying (if I could coin a new term). But, we should be intelligent enough to have the ability to do some critical thinking and bypass the bullshit.

 

In about seven days we are likely to see quite different results regarding polymorphic detection when AV-Comparatives results are released. Symantec has scored perfect results the last three tests. I look at the anti-malware.ru results with a fair amount of skepticism.

 

You may be right, but the results can vary a lot depending on the test source. We often say that if your AV of choice scored well, the test was valid. If it didn't, the test was flawed.

 

It should be noted that the test set for the Av-Comparatives.org poly test has not changed during the last three tests at all... (i.e. for ~2 years). Also, it contained some rather old / lab-only viruses.

The author of this new anti-malware.ru test at least used quite recent viruses, so the test result should be somewhat closer to reality...

Cheers
Vlk

 

Thanks for pointing that out.

 

Useless test, why don't they test DOS viruses instead? They're only slightly older than poly viruses.