The latest lightest Anti-virus?

Well, it's good to use genric unpackers but adding static unpackers is also a good ideea, because generic can't cover evrything. Perhaps this will be implemented in v. 3.0.

 

NOD32 already has some static unpackers (i've no idea how many), but it has some.

 

Bullshit. It's exactly the opposite way: Static Unpacker can be fooled much easier than Emulation based unpacking. Best solution is a combination of both: Emulation and static functions for decompressing algorithms.

 

Out of the following lite products, how are the detection rates:

- KAV
- NOD
- Antivir
- DrWeb

 

More or less in that order.

 

I second that.

 

Depends on the type of test wouldn't you say?

 

anyway of course nod32 and kaspersky are around the same but kaspersky updates faster like 16-24 hours a day

 

More updates per day does not mean that the AV actually detects more. For instance, if an AV must add signatures in order to catch malware detected by the other AV heuristically without update it does not make it better because of more updates, quite the contrary.

 

.................and just because a AV detects some viruses heuristically doesn't mean it actually detects as much as the other AV, does it..

What is it that makes adding signatures as often as Kaspersky does such an apparantly annoying fact to those that statisticly adds signatures once a day, that it should be made to look like a "bad" thing for others to do this for their customers, i cannot understand this attitude, i simply can't.

You don't feel the need to do this for your customers, fair enough, Kaspersky does, fair enough too IMO, why not just leave it at that?

 

This seems to be turning into another NOD vs KAV thread.

 

That statement is non-sense!
There is no guarantee that heuristics are going to get everything, even NOD32's heuristics is only 58% or so accurate at AV Comparatives. But if the signature is there, then it is a done deal.

 

Agreed...