AV-TEST certificate Windows 8 Jan/Feb 2013

It is up:

http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-8/janfeb-2013/

The BitDefender engine products, Kaspersky, and Trend Micro all maxed out protection.

 

great job Webroot

 

Impressed with AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition.
Unfortunately they did not test Bitdefender Free.

 

Comodo 2 x 22 false positives and poor protection against 0-day malware attacks. I see Melih crying ...

The Kaspersky engine in Zonealarm isn't as good as the original in Kaspersky.

 

Well, Kaspersky isn't going to license away their latest engine.

 

Comodo has problem with FPs, mostly because of aggressive heuristics and sensitive CAMAS cloud behavior analyzer.
But their 0-day protection is one of the best because of "Default deny" approach.
That is why I doubt AV-Test's results for Proactive protection.
Once Valkyrie gets included, I think we will see different picture here...

 

Very good to see Eset perform well in protection.
TrendMicro continues its excellent performance.

 

BullGuard proves once again a very good antivirus....

 

All vendors/brands with the Bitdefender built-in scores best at this test. Clearly it's Bitdefenders' year again as it was last year.

Comodo's total score is actually lower than Windows Defender 4.0. I wonder what's their "excuse" is going to be this time?

 

Repair/removal is no longer being tested.
Good to see Eset finally doing better(protection wise at least, since repair testing is gone)

 

Probably that the testing method is not what it should be and that procedure is not certified.
But, to be honest....CIS is an excellent product and it is very hard to get your PC infected while it is on patrol.


You can not be serious and put WD in the same sentence with CIS.

 

Is detail report of the test available?

 

I trust only in AV-Comparatives & Virus Bullettin Tests.

 

I dont see Windows Defender in the list?

UPDATE - OK, got it.

 

I agree

 

Any info/details on the testing method?

I wonder how they interpreted AutoSandbox results.

125 zeroday samples used. Do they provide samples on request?

 

I found only this....
http://www.av-test.org/en/test-procedures/

 

On this link its mentioned "The meticulous documentation and archiving of the results of these tests enable AV-TEST to provide report files, data packets containing test data, screen shots and images, as well as to verify and reproduce results, at short notice and at any time."

Do they provide test samples on request atleast to the vendor?

 

http://www.av-test.org/en/test-procedures/test-modules/


Protection
Repair
Usability

 

In the protection procedure its mentioned -

"If access to the website or e-mail is blocked or the protection program displays a message, this is documented. The point at which access is blocked or the technique used to do so does not play a role in this stage of the procedure:
Access to the URL is blocked.
The exploit on the website is identified and blocked.
Download of malicious components is blocked.
Use of malicious components is blocked."

Does this means if URL Blocker of a product blocked the malicious links its counted as the product protected from the malware?

If yes, then products with URL blocker have a plus point in this test.

 

This may be so and latest versions are improved in regard to FPs and general annoyingness but whenever I've tried CIS, I've found it very hard to concentrate on getting work done. In that aspect, comparisons with MSE are not favourable.

 

The performance results do not reflect my experience in the least. I've yet to find an antivirus software that's lighter than Windows Defender, aside from perhaps SecureAnywhere.

 

Bitdefender AV Free feels much lighter. WSA is the best by far performance-wise with 0 seconds delay overall with industry average at 5 seconds.

 

Bull Guard and Webroot...high "5"!

 

All free AV products offer better protection than Avira Internet Security, well done Avira.