Avira AntiVir 9 released!

Your comparatives? And what do you base it on that. So am I to assume that the tests done at av-comparatives is not up to your standards. I have sysinternals suite and I don't get any FP.

 

Hi Arup, nothing wrong with av-comparatives, or whatever-comparatives.
You don't trust agagouga-comparatives (agree, that's what you have to do) because for example you don't trust the samples collection (where are they? where are they coming from? how many? etc), the selection criteria (why sample X is in the test and not sample Y), etc . For the same reasons, i don't like whatever-comparatives. Its easy to create a sample collection that X antivirus has 100% detection rate on it and also create another sample collection that the same X antivirus has 0% detection rate...
Never said that avira is a bad product or has low detection rate, i just wanted more from a top-class AV (edit: Avira still exists on my system )

About sysinternals suite, yesterday my Avira screamed about pskill.exe (and maybe one more, don't remember...), today about psexec.exe (both in pstools, system/network admin tools)...
I have no idea why you don't have any fp on this

 

You have selected appl (Aplication)in extended threats that's why it detects it.With default settings it doesn't
Also i';m not sure it can be considered as FP's

 

Yeap virtumonde, as a paranoid, i clicked check everything in extended threats after avira install (it seemed so natural to me at this time that i didn't remember that i did it ). So I agree with you this one can not be considered as FP.
I had other FPs also (do not throw stones, i'm not an avira-hater) like soundblaster-update & some more, but anyway not so big problem as i realized right away that they are FPs.

Peace & Love

 

You see this is where the problems arise. There are groups of users with settings at default and others with it at high. Some have the extended threats enabled, others don't.

Even those who have heuristics set at high may not see FPs because they don't have the applications/packages on their system to start with so they can quite happily say they've never seen or had any FPs. If FPs occur, they can be reported or at least be ignored on future scans.

Testing organisations can, however, test a whole gamut of software packages that many of us probably would never install. It is some of those that may create the FPs until fixed.

 

With over 99% detection, least amount of issues, running with consistency, I think Avira is doing the best it can. You just blew away AV comparatives and accused them of some serious accusations there. If I am not mistaken, what you are saying is that AV Comparatives doctors its tests specifically for Avira and to make it look better than others. Am I correct, hopefully not.............

 

Hey man, don't be so suspicious, i never said these words. I just said why I don't like any Comparatives in general. It's better to talk for statistical arguments or philosophical inconsonance.

 

You use Avira you wrote your opinion.Why care what others say?
If u didn't and simply post in order to bash like some Avira haters do than it would not have been nice.
I also wrote that i don't like when it gives FP's mainly when it's about mainstream software.But contrary to what many belive,it doesn't do so on a regular basis.I would dare to say as a user of 3 AV products, that except NOrton ,Mcafee who have low FP's rate ,Avira is no more or less than the others regarding this.
When FP's apear Avira are among the quickest to fix them.

 

Yes, you are right. When i read that i felt compelled to insert some b*llshit into the discussion (& more), i 'd better close the browser & just forget it. But unfortunately I didn't, so after all, one accuses me for hater, other for b*llshit insertor, other for conspiracy theorist about a/v rankings.

Better to go, please an admin remove all my posts. Good bye & wish the best to you

 

Lol ,it's always like this when the comparative tests are publiced.In fact that thread it's doing quite well ,usually they are closed quickly.You got your ideea why

 

Some people just like to create a stir...... I posted earlier in this thread about a FP but in reality it wasen't. Brico Packs modify some system files and Avira correctly identified it as being modified. Even though the modification is harmless, Avira caught a change in a system file. This is why Avira is always at the top in any AV test. It's one of the best in detection.

Ice

 

Hmmm so Avira has light HIPS now?

 

Funny you should mention this,because I just posted about this issue the other day. I've got the Vista Brico Pack theme installed as well and had the same FP.

No biggie,just click on ignore and all is once again awsome for Avira

 

I wouldn't call it a light hips but I can see the direction Avira is trying to make. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I thought I read somewhere Avira was going to integrate some kind of hips module in their suite.

Ice

 

it might or might not have HIPS of some sort in v10, although its all speculation.

 

no it does not, it just lets u scan for modified system files now, which i think is a great feature.

 

The next version of Avira, which will probaly be next year, will have HIPS. May it come out sooner? Maybe, but Avira does not release anything till they know it works. When they accomplish this, they will move up the chain even higher.

 

My thoughts:

Avira has two problems since long and I don,t expect them to be resolved in near future.

1- Update issues, I can,t recommend it for slow connections or dial up at all.
2- False positives, OK for us but frightening and so problemetic for ordinary users.

Modified file scan is wonderfull? Does it work like the one in KAV? Means it will reduce scan times too much?

IMO no HIPS needed in an AV. Ordinary users don,t need HIPS. However something like KAV,s sandboxing( categorizing applicatiuons as trsuted, untrusted, etc on the basis of a white list) and a behaviour blocker like TF, PRSC is much more desired.

 

agreed. What it will evolve into I honestly dont know. But I trust in Avira to make something that is, 1. user friendly and 2. works.

 

I really don't think your #1 issue is an issue at all anymore. I have noticed in Avira 9 free that updates are pretty fast, and nothing like the problems we've seen last year or in the past. I think they have fixed this one already.

I won't comment on FPs, I'm still trying to figure out which is worse, an FP or a missed detection. I think I'd rather live with an FP to be honest.

 

May be you are right about updates but remember update issues were never universal even in the past, some had this problem and some never experienced it.
I personally have not used it for some time so I am not so sure.

 

Update servers have never been FASTER. I know several people on dial up,no problems updating with the server upgrade.Cable internet isnt even an issue.

 

Been there done that, that is the first thing I did. I think I found a work around. I been reading Avera forums, it seems that people have a whole host of problems with Avera v9. I'm glad I am not the only one.

 

I've already had two separate updates where I've had to reboot since installing version 9. I don't recall the last time it ever happened with version 8.

 

That's odd, I haven't had to reboot even once yet on mine.