AV-Comparatives (February 2009)

Hello JerryM,
long time no talk. Hope you are well.
f-secure uses kaspersky version 6 sdk engine.
kaspersky 2009 has a completely brand new rewritten engine from scratch and also has brand new heristics.
f-secure uses its own inhouse engines as welll as deepguard 2.0 for proactive detection. as soon as you excute the files deepguard will jump in.

kaspersky only started improving its heristics with version 7.
kaspersky only sells engine plus signitures and doesnt include the heristics or any heristic updates as far as i know.

I hope this helps you better understand the difference.

f-secure is a fine AV and still excels in detection.
its ondemand heristics have never been good.

 

Arrg, 2 softwares that interests me that I would love to see tested..
CAVS and Viper..

Guess they didn't make it =/ (YET).

 

I'd like to see Vipre in a test too. I'm really interested for their home site license.

 

i was hoping for Vipre to be in this test, but guess not, HOPEFULLY Vipre is included in the proactive test that usually comes sometime after.

 

Congrats to ESET for being so consistent over the years. I'm glad I renew my license for two more years.

 

Didn't their detection go down when v3 was released? It seems back up now though.

 

Hi Lodore, and Trjam,

Thanks for the explanation. I might give it a try when my Systweak license runs out. I always liked it except that it took so long to scan compared to KIS.

I'm doing OK and getting over a staph infection in my spine. It is hard to keep an old horse down.

Jeff, are you staying with one AV for a long time now? Since I have not been here lately much, I have not seen all the avatars you have had.

Good to talk to you.

Best regards,
Jerry

 

Err, no, Jerr. Thats the same Avira avatar I have always had.

 

I'm glad that BitDefender started off on the right foot this year and regained some space. The last comparative was a mess and I was a little concerned about my AV.

96% detection and a slightly higher number of FP on last comparative was a little weak. I sure hope this year on their next version I'll se some more action.

 

I think that NOD32 and Kaspersky are the strongest candidates for the AV product of the Year award this year.

 

I think I will have some of what you are smoking.

 

Probably true, based on past performance. Although I wouldn't mind if Symantec won the award.

 

With those detection rates, probably not. McAfee was probably #1 when you take FPs into account.. but I still consider AntiVir the #1 AV. Out of all those samples, the difference in FPs wasn't that big a deal.

 

yep. mcafee is doing a great job nowadays

 

Probably McAfee, if you don't mind their habit of collecting and sharing of personal (?) data with Doubleclick and others, and it being a resource hog.

Oh, let's not forget the lousy technical support.

 

Avira will never be no1 until they fix their FP issue. Anyone can have higher detection rate with more sensitive heuristics. Notice in the russian test most detections were around 61%? That seems to be the golden number to me. I'm betting if Avira fix their issue, their heuristics will result at about 61 instead of 71.

Also, because of that, no one will ever seriously issue avira in corporate environments.

 

ok, i HIGHLY doubt nobody, can u show me somewhere that it says no uses Avira in a corporate environment? i dont think so, they wouldnt have a corporate version if nobody used it, please dont try to just bash. and really, ANYONE? u seem pretty dam sure of urself, so why dont u make one, or why doesnt EVERYONE just make it like theirs? u try to make it sound like Avira does nothing.

please dont post in here to insult an AV... and criticize the hard work they do.

 

I'm not criticizing the hard work they do, I'm criticizing hes bold statement that they are no1.

Using Avira in the corporate environment is the risk of the person in charge of making the decision, all I'm stating is why it's unpopular in that market.

 

They are #1 at detection.....

 

as i said, where are u basing that its unpopular? do u have any sort of proof, or are those just ur feelings as i think they are...? and yes u are criticizing them, by saying ANYONE can do the same with their heuristics, ur basically saying anyone can have the same heur detection as them like they didnt do anything worth mentioning...

 

Sigh, I'm not looking for an argument, read the PDF again:

1. They are not no1 detection, beaten by GData.
2. They are not no1 false positives, beaten by several companies.

This is the only point I'm making: they are not no1.

 

Now anything is possible. Despite of almost 100% of detection, Avira was already pulled down from its number one position because of 24 fp's on a test bed of 1.3 million of malware samples. Go figure

 

NOD32 will probably win the performance test if there will be one this year. Kaspersky will probably win best on-access scanning speed (part of the performance test) and then the tiebreaker will be decided through the proactive on-demand detection test.

 

G Data had almost twice as many FPs.... but ok, you're right.

 

Agreed. That's why I'm saying based on probabilities, the AVs who scored
Advanced+ in the latest test have the best chance.