Which AV software's heuristic scan performs better ?

Since when did worms surpass trojans, bots and keyloggers as the most important thing?

 

Thanks for posting that. I had questions about AV response times, that I mentioned in another thread. This helps a lot.

True, technically. I guess I've been bested yet again.

For me the problem is brain to hand transaction. Better give me 30 min.

 

I was talking about heuristic detection. Do you see big spread of one particular trojan and/or spyware infecting hundreds of thousands of users in one day? Do you need 0-day protection from trojans and spyware? Isn't that what signatures should help cover?

EDIT: According to http://www.virusradar.com/ worms are the top 10 threats.

 

Well, whether you like it or not, worms are the top 10 threats (see my previous post).

 

I thought virusradar shows only the email threats and that is the reason why worms are on top there. Just confirmed, on that page i read "This page contains analysis of e-mail virus threats."

 

Ok, sorry, my mistake. The point is, I've never heard of big trojan-outbreaks or big spyware-outbreaks. But I'm sure everyone (even computer illiterates) have heard of worm-outbreaks (remember Sasser f.ex.)?

 

What is the % that you give to the signature-based test and to heuristic test?

100% = X%(signature-based) + Y%(heuristic)

 

dunno

 

at least I see that the term "behaviour blockers" is not for the older members but it is still active .. thanx IBK

 

Because thats not the point of trojans and bots. As i said, every idiot can mass spam worms, but spreading trojans and bots and keep them hidden for enough time is not that easy. However they often use email as mean of distribution. And IM. Good thing about this is that you can push the crap to users. And then it's up to them whether they'll run it or not. Most of them run it anyway...