AV-Test release latest results(08.9.2)

kdcdq,

Nicely summed up, Avast is doing real good and version 5 will bring even more improvements. Avira as usual, no comparison.....consistency is what its about and it does it so well.

 

Agreed.

Waiting on AV-Co tests to see how everything comparis but its good to see Norton among others going well. and its at least showing where others need to improve.

 

I see 3.

1- It's free when you have a valid license
2- There will be no more bug fixes on BD2008
3- New(or improved of the old?) behaviorhal scanner(I read they where including some kind of HIPS in it, not sure the module is in there yet though)

and if you are using the suite
4- A better firewall

 

True. But as far as I know the technology they acquired from Komoku hasn't been incorporated into OC yet (maybe 3.0?).

 

Nothing suprising from Dr.Web I see, they've been between 82~-93~% in several tests for past few years.

 

Nice response times for Eset which runs contrary to all the moaning in the forum.

 

There is one AV vendor which, in my opinion, MUST participate further testing, and that is Proland with their Protector Plus. As with Rising, this vendor is -- so it seems -- trying to do better.

 

Did you forget norton on purpose !

 

Nope...

We are all just in shock. that Norton has change around.. give us a few months for the shock to ware off.

 

Good job Eset.

 

This is a surprise to me, but Rising's email monitor actually works with Opera! Are there any tests about how well AVs perform by way of their email monitors?

 

trjam,

Not meaning to give you a hard time but are we looking at the same numbers?

If you look at NOD32s performance for malware on-demand it finished 22nd (out of 34), and if you look at its performance for adware/spyware on-demand it finished 18th (out of 34).

 

I think he was talking about the last post on Response times.

 

Good response times and proactive detection...but still average in terms of overall detection...doesn't sound very consistent to me...

EDIT: I think everyone realises already but just to clarify, I'm talking about ESET.

 

Also considering that "proactive" actually is only heuristic in NOD32's case

 

Maybe the sample set didn't have too much real-world malware?

 

I dont think anyone is independently qualified to say anythingh about that n if there r they wont b posting here

 

I was just speculating. IMHO it's a reasonable assumption that not all of the 1 258 953 malware that a small team of people found would be real-world, considering all the antivirus vendors are struggling to keep up.

 

That i cannot argue with, its just that i have heard too much about realworld malware when certain products dont do well in tests n vendors n users say well its perfect against that but no real proof can be given. The way i see it, tests r very usefull as they provide samples 2 study n all kinds of info about malware for them to improve their products. If it werent for these tests AV's would be long gone n buried.

 

I was under the impression Norton only did weekly updates with daily updates available via the web. If they're changing this format, I do hope they have QA testing time between updates, which is what they're renowned for by producing no false positives because of this.

I wouldn't like to see a repeat of the update that crippled some computers in China. There's a risk of such things happening again if updates are so frequent as mentioned above without full QA testing in between.

 

Its their pulse updates they send out extremely frequently. I'm running the beta, and you don't even notice when they come in.

 

What ever gave you that idea... even in the 2008 and 2007 versions there are daily updates, they check for updates multiple times a day, but in reality it would mostly actually download about once (maybe twice) a day.

But in Norton 2009 the update process changed radically, it actually downloads pulse (streaming) updates every 5 to 10 minutes. Those are tiny malware definition updates which are released as soon as they are done creating them. For the people who missed those streaming definitions, Norton will download all streaming definitions released in the last 4 hours in one big download and will then continue back to download streaming definitions every 5 to 10 minutes again. And by download I actually mean "download", not just doing an update check.

 

This is great for all their clients/users but let's not forget Symantec haven't found the "hot water" . Most other vendors have started to offer small incremential updates multiple times a day long time ago

 

Does anyone know the meaning of the scan speed column? Is this stand-alone scan? System scan impact? What do the various results here mean?

 

5-10 mins?