Active infections treatment test

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by IlyaOS, Jul 30, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. IlyaOS

    IlyaOS Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Posts:
    29
    Hi everybody!

    I found another intersting antivirus test that had been made by Anti-Malware Test Lab. They analyzed the ability of popular antivirus programs to treat active infections -- that is, when a malicious program has been executed and installed on a computer and may be using various methods to prevent detection and removal by antivirus solutions.

    Award Products

    1st place
    Norton AntiVirus 2007 (80%)

    2nd place
    Kaspersky Anti-Virus 6.0 (70%)

    3rd place
    Avast! Professional Edition 4.7 (50%)
    Eset NOD32 Antivirus 2.7 (50%)
    Sophos Anti-Virus 6.0 (50%)
    BitDefender Antivirus 10 (50%)
    AVZ 4.21 (50%)

    Poor results
    AVG Anti-Virus PE 7.5 (40%)
    McAfee VirusScan 2007 (40%)
    Panda Antivirus 2007 (40%)
    Avira AntiVir СE 7.0 (30%)
    Dr.Web Anti-Virus 4.33 (30%)
    F-Secure Anti-Virus 2007 (30%)
    Trend Micro PC-Cillin 2007 (30%)
    VBA32 Antivirus 3.11 (30%)

    http://www.anti-malware-test.com/?q=taxonomy/term/14

    Testing methodology
    For the purposes of testing antivirus programs for the treatment of active infections, the expert group from Anti-Malware.ru selected 10 malicious programs based on the following criteria:

    1. Detection of the parent file by all of the antivirus solutions tested.
    2. Ability to mask the malicious program’s presence in the system.
    3. Ability to interfere with the installation and operation of the antivirus solutions.
    4. Ability to recover after deletion some program components.
    5. All malicious programs had to be sufficiently widespread and well known.
    ....

    http://www.anti-malware-test.com/?q=node/10
    http://www.anti-malware-test.com/?q=node/9

    What do you think about this?
     
  2. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I think their is some validity to it, but realize I will get chewed up for saying it.
     
  3. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    I wonder why F-Secure would score so low compared to Kaspersky.
    Jerry
     
  4. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    Hi jerry,
    maybe its because kaspersky 6 and onwards has advanced disenfection technology?
    lodore
     
  5. Don Pelotas

    Don Pelotas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    2,257
    No, i just think it is not a great test..................it's hard to believe the difference would be this big. :)
     
  6. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    I don't know a great deal about these things, but when something looks so far out of line I have to wonder about the worth of the test.

    Best,
    Jerry
     
  7. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    If it's malware-test it can't be reliable
     
  8. KDNeese

    KDNeese Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Posts:
    236
    Norman beating both Kaspersky AND NOD32o_O Give me a break...
     
  9. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    its Norton, not Norman.
     
  10. IlyaOS

    IlyaOS Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Posts:
    29
    The difference between this two product is huge, Kaspersky Anti-Virus 6.0 has special ability to treat some kinds of difficult malware. F-Secure hasn't, because it based on KAV engine only without such technologies.
     
  11. IlyaOS

    IlyaOS Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Posts:
    29
    It's Anti-Malware Test Lab ;)
     
  12. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    oops Im going blind. I still wonder if they are reliable though. 10 infections is not a lot.
     
  13. Coolio10

    Coolio10 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,124
    It's funny how every time norton/mcafee or any other long hated av products does good than the test has to be fake :D. Face it people, Norton is coming back to own kaspersky. Even in av comparatives its retrospective test is going high.

    Be afraid, be very afraid :shifty: .

    Ever since 2007 version norton is getting better like before it was bought by symantec. I am not that old but i heard things about it was good before symantec bought it :D.

    I am also sure F-secure only shares kaspersky's engine but not its cleaning ability.

    I am with you trjam! I am ready to be flamed ;)
     
  14. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Hi Coolio10,

    Aside from this test, what evidence do you have that FSIS is so inferior to Kaspersky?
    This is not an argumentative question, but a search for information.

    Thanks,
    Jerry
     
  15. Coolio10

    Coolio10 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,124
    You test me :eek: .

    http://support.kaspersky.com/faq/?qid=193239259

    Never seen that feature in F-secure though i have never used it :D.

    A simple automatic safe mode feature in kaspersky can cause it do much better than F-Secure as many know :D.

    Safe mode stops almost all viruses from loading.
     
  16. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
  17. IlyaOS

    IlyaOS Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Posts:
    29
    Come on ... treatment ability is not the same as detection rate.
    Norton can miss a lot of malware that kaspersky don't, otherwise Norton will successfully desinfect they.

    Guys from Anti-Malware Test Lab got the ten most complicated malware using different method to hide itself from anti-virus. It takes much more time then just scan 10 files on HDD.
     
  18. Durad

    Durad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2005
    Posts:
    591
    Location:
    Canada
    I remember few years ago (during virus time) Norton was one of the best for cleaning viruses.

    However even during NAV2005-2006 it was rated "the best" by many "independent" testers and we know that at that time Norton was not that good.

    I agree with wollowing:

     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.