Anti-malware.ru June 2012 IDS/IPS test

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by King Grub, Jun 7, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
  2. JCRUYFF

    JCRUYFF Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Posts:
    87
    Hi

    In almost all .ru Lab test place Kaspersky 1st place.
    Coincidence?
     
  3. toxinon12345

    toxinon12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Posts:
    1,200
    Location:
    Managua, Nicaragua
    Maybe all samples were collected in Russia
    thanks for the link. I am more interested in the upcoming Retrospective test by AV-C
     
  4. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Then Dr. Web should be #2 at least.
     
  5. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    USA
    ...and Outpost should be in the top 3 instead of the bottom 5.
     
  6. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,011
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Another ho hum security testing organization that ain't worth a crap for anyone. IMHO :rolleyes:

    TH
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2012
  7. Umbra

    Umbra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Posts:
    2,157
    Location:
    in a remote land :)
    +1

    McAfee...:rolleyes:
     
  8. kareldjag

    kareldjag Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2004
    Posts:
    622
    Location:
    PARIS AND ITS SUBURBS
    hi
    Quite agree with the Prevx helper.
    why the choice of an old and statistically uncommon OS, Unpatched OS but updated products, non stealth port scan, non based pentesting methods and techniques, approximative vision of some terminolgy, not equal product list, suspect ethical and independence way, limited different tests that does not circumscribe the full potential of each product and limit the legitimacy of the funny awards...
    As usual of course, criticism is easy, but testing is difficult.

    I remember a stress test of Prevx by Matasano or Immunitysec wich was much more interesting than this one.
    By experience, i am convinced that comparative testing is in an absolute way a dead end.

    rgds
     
  9. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,219
    Well it is #3, and why would they accept to be tested only here out of all places? Emisoft 52%? No way, I think the Russian old boys network sticks here unashamedly.
     
  10. Scoobs72

    Scoobs72 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Posts:
    1,108
    Location:
    Sofa (left side)
    Is this the most absurd test ever? If you run Windows unpatched then you're very unlikely to be running any firewall/IDS/IPS anyway, because you're that stupid. Unbelievable.
     
  11. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,219
    I withdraw my criticism as I was reading an older test:
    http://translate.google.com/transla...ww.anti-malware.ru/test_personal_IDS_IPS_2012

    I still find odd the results of G DATA and BitDefender which usually score very high in just about any test.
     
  12. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
    Not at all, if you want to test the capabilities of the products. If you tested vulnerabilities with an OS where those vulnerabilities have been patched, they would all score the same because the exploits would be blocked on an OS level.

    And believe it or not, many average users do not update their system or programs.
     
  13. ams963

    ams963 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Posts:
    5,965
    Location:
    Parallel Universe
    The test is simply rubbish. :thumbd:
     
  14. Scoobs72

    Scoobs72 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Posts:
    1,108
    Location:
    Sofa (left side)
    My point is that the test has near zero practical use. With anti-virus tests you can at least (rightly or wrongly) make a buying decision from the test. What would somebody with an unpatched XP3 system do who stumbled across this test? Run Windows Update or go out and buy Kaspersky instead?
     
  15. Narxis

    Narxis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Posts:
    477
    This is a very good test!
     
  16. gery

    gery Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Posts:
    1,785
    guys if the judgement your are giving is based on facts you have please let us know the facts but if this is only your opinion well it lets anyone choose if the test is to be trusted or not
    cheers Gery
     
  17. BoerenkoolMetWorst

    BoerenkoolMetWorst Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Posts:
    3,764
    Location:
    Outer space
    Seems like a reasonably trustworthy test to me. I know of no other organization that publicizes test results from network attacks/IPS/IDS so you can't really say it's rubbish because products that normally score good now don't or the other way around. New 'real world' testing methods from respected testing organizations for malware also use unpatched and outdated software, I haven't seen them criticized about that either. Plus, from what I see with people I know, the statement that users who run unpatched windows versions are unlikely to run any firewall/IDS software is incorrect, as I see many with Windows update turned of because they use a pirated windows and are afraid it will stop working after an update, but they still run up to date security software. Of course IDS/IPS is only a small part of a product and since a lot of people are behind NAT/SPI routers the results of test like these will influence the decision to use some security software much less than test results from anti-malware tests, but some people are a lot on public WiFi with their notebooks, so for them it's more relevant.
     
  18. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    Wait what?
    So they are telling me a regular AV Suite beats dedicated HIPS in a HIPS test?
    Okay . . . :rolleyes:
     
  19. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    Yes, because the test is about external network attacks. It's not a HIPS test.
     
  20. tomazyk

    tomazyk Guest

    So almost 30% of attacks bypassed Comodo set to max? (that would be Defence+ set to paranoid). To me, that's hard to believe.
     
  21. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
    Wouldn't Defence+ protect against internal attacks? This is an external attack test.
     
  22. tomazyk

    tomazyk Guest

    Remote code execution should be prevented by Defence+. DoS attacks probably not. So as I understand they either crashed system with some DoS attacks or they found holes in Comodo's Defence+ set to max.
     
  23. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
  24. tomazyk

    tomazyk Guest

    OK. Thank you for link.
     
  25. pbust

    pbust AV Expert

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2009
    Posts:
    1,173
    Location:
    Spain
    Tests by anti-malware.ru have always been done using simulators and unrealistic scenarios. To top it off towards the end of the page you see this:

    Comments Partners Anti-Malware.ru
    Oleg Adrianov, Manager of Product Certification "Kaspersky Lab"


    So Kaspersky is an Anti-Malware.ru "partner"? I wonder what the terms of this partnership are.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.