WOW have you guys read the PCMAG review of nod32?

Poetic Justice

All those June 2004 "NOD32 Is A Weak Virus Detector" magazine reports had me wondering for a while if I'd wasted my money.

Thankfully the old faithful Virus Bulletin came along and pissed on Andreas Marx's chance for fame and glory by crediting NOD32 with 100% detection of In The Wild and Zoo viruses only 2 weeks after the AV-Test crap was published.

 

Re: Poetic Justice

Ditto. But I don't know what to make of the test referred to here. From what I can tell (with my limited understanding of this stuff) is that it's still underperforming competitors.

Bit it sure works good for me!

 

For those not in the know - gaobot is a worm - not a virus. NOD32 is primarily an anti-virus programme. True, NOD32 can catch some non-virii malware but this is not its forté at this time.

 

Re: Poetic Justice

Your conclusions are wrong. Detection failures in a retrospective test are not up for discussion.
All the 13 products are already a selection of very good scanners, so also the scanner on place 13. would be good, because it has a quite good detection rate also over zoo-samples (over 85% - thats a condition to participate). So you can not say that e.g. NOD32 is underperforming. Do not take to much care about little percentage differences. I think I will change something in future so that it will be more clear that this does not matter so much.

 

Since the last outbreaks were all caused by worms, it would be a poor excuse. NOD also claims to catch spyware - if you believe the marketing guys. Real viruses are very rare today. The agobot family is a problem for all AV´s - there are too many variants and there is no real "generic" behaviour. An agobot can perform almost every task, from password-stealing to DDoS attacks. And Eset seems to be very busy adding signatures for it - like all other vendors too.

 

Re: Poetic Justice

Not sure if this is getting off subject, but what is a "retrospective" test?

 

Hello Sandish

This is why we use a layered defense and in particular use WormGuard from DiamondCS as an anti-worm defense.

As we had posted some time ago - one day perhaps we can buy just one programme to be our firewall and anti-virus, anti-worm, anti-Trojan, anti-spyware, anti-malware, and anti-adware programme. Until that time - layered defense is the best bet.

Best wishes

 

I still wonder how you guys determine that NOD32 is the best AV in the world.

 

New Quote: From list

Hi gang,

Just a short notice.
Anton Zajac, CEO of Eset, producer of NOD32 has met with the PC Magazine's editor in chief in regards of the misleading review of the Antivirus systems published in the recent edition of PC Magazine and the review has been removed from their website.

Unfortunately they used a misleading testing methodology supplied from Germany, which all Anti-Virus vendors and scientists in the Anti-virus industry declared as unethical and misleading.

Read from this what you will.

 

Na, I got this from my email list. The following was also included.

How about a kiss and make up from Ziff Davis?

http://www.pcmagmedia.com/promotions/

It great to see so many opinions of this product and the strength of knowledge of this product by individual users. The reaction to that article was amazing just the same. I've learned quite a bit coming here and can't thank you all enough. I just thank GOD I stumbled across this forum!!

 

Hmn...Well PC Mag still has this article online (from the June mag) on AV's and it still includes references to poor performance by NOD. Inluding citing AV-Test.org's results of "30" false positives by NOD. (Although what looks like the same AV-Test.org test supposedly resulted in "31" fp's in PC World's article.)

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1586106,00.asp

So the info on the email list doesn't seem to be entirely accurate. Although here there is listed a review/article by the same author just on NOD32 that seems to have been removed. http://www.pcmag.com/search_results/0,1744,,00.asp?qry=Larry Seltzer&site=3 Still the article linked above, presumably based on the same "misleading" testing methodology, remains.

And the PC World article, also based on AV-Test's tests, still remains online:
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,115939,pg,4,00.asp

 

I hope the malware writers are going to stick to methods of writing the stuff and types of malware they produce that the av vendors approve of otherwise they will also have to be convinced to do things the approved ways!
I'm afraid to me if an AV misses a virus it misses a virus it shouldn't depend on how the test is conducted after all how can the vendors specify how users use their pc's,the av vendors should try to cover ALL types of usage/test and not try to change methology to suit the way their products work!

 

IBK Test/Review over at av-comparatives.org is one of the better Comparison test(s) I have seen!

I think any one of us would be will served with any of the top AV. I have tried most of them, there isn't any-one AV that is 100 proof, every AV I have own has at least allowed one virii through and for anyone to solely base there decision to switch AVs on (because) 'the one that got through' is irrational and irresponsible, many more factors should be included.

I have been to, to many sites regarding AV testing that left me with more question then answers, I would like all AV/AT testing Open, Seamless and Transparent

The Lans Parties that I run, over half the membership uses NOD32, I personally use Tm PC-cillin 04, I have yet to receive a complaint from the NOD32 users.

It boils down to one thing, will it work for me NOT, is it the best AV. The best AV would be a nightmare if it didn’t work for you and what I mean by that, does it interact fluently with my computer, is the GUI easy for me to use and understand.

A 80% detection rate (with system stability) far exceeds a 98 detection rate (without system stability) bottom line, the best isn’t always the best!

Sorry, had to through my $0.02

-wayne

 

OMG, somebody is about to receive big kick in the ***


edited to conform to TOS - Detox

 

Wouldn't be the first time, and why do you say that?

edited quote to meet TOS - Detox

 

Hi,

I was only reporting on what was recieved by me from the list. I see the article is still online. I don't exactly know the settlement between the two companies, nor is it my business, but I think removing the article would be the honorable thing to do. Testing is flawed and seems biased.

 

Well it does seem that a review of NOD32 contained in the same mag issue was removed from the web site, so that's something. Not having seen the apparently deleted review, I don't know what it was like. But if something was removed due to being based on a flawed and misleading test, certainly the other article covering various AV's logically would seem a target for removal also. Although it would be helpful if the reasons for deleting a review/article were actually provided on the site.

 

Hello wayne_b

Are you saying that you have had a virus infect a computer while using NOD32? If so please identify the virus and if not then so far we have not been able to document even one ITW virus that NOD32 has not stopped.

Thank you for your anticipated response.

 

Not infect, My system has never been infected, but some have made it to some of my hard drives, that's as far as it made it!

What I am saying, is some have made it through the drag-net, just haven't had a chance to cause problems.

No, never used NOD32, it very will can be the best but, I wouldn't bet my data that it is 100 proof (100%) If anyone gets that complacent, then I say they are asking for trouble.

-wayne

 

Thank you for your response and may you remain virus free!