AV-Comparatives 2011 dynamic tests

like that

 

I want to see Comodo tested on AV comparatives, I have doubts on that product thats why I only leave it installed on my system unit for only a day. only matousec praise Comodo

 

I am using this for a month and I am pleased. Other than a little performance lag during scanning, it performed great in my system. I found the application protection better than in 2010. What kind of bloat are you talking about.

 

I reckon you are basically correct. Comodo have been in a cat fight with these testers in the past and took their ball away. A sort of playground squabble about testing procedures - "I`m not playing with you anymore".

It is unfortunate that these people cannot agree on petty matters, because a product comparison of this nature becomes incomplete - the bridegroom turns up in immaculate dress, minus his trousers.

John

 

Very Informative!

+1.

 

LOL! You just commented!

 

I think that in this test, Avira is represented with the free version.

 

no, all are (paid) suites in this test (except Qihoo and MSE).

 

Thanks, you're right. It's seen at the top of the page.

 

It's too bad AV-C isn't posting the hashes of the samples used. No one can tell if the results are true or false and neither can the public reproduce any similar result. Only the AV-vendors participating in the test will know if the result actually is accurate as they get the missed samples sent to them; the public (user(s)) does not.

The reason of this post is that we're all welcoming these kind of tests (me included!) while few criticize the testing methods; at least the public users does not criticize as the AV-vendors get the samples actually missed sent to them.

 

It's been asked before but are you guys planning to do this kind of dynamic testing for (paid) AV's also instead of suites only (minus MSE and Qihoo)?

I've read your/AV-C's arguments for continuing the current extensive on-demand (and 2 month follow-up) tests but imho changing focus to dynamic AV testing like the suites test in this topic, would be very well received.
Such test would be seen as one of the (if not THE) most important/influencial test available.

Don't take this too personal shadek but do you have any particular reason to doubt AV-C's testing methods/sample sets used?
(I wouldn't mind such info myself though)

 

I do not. But I see a window of improvement potential. Why aren't the public (read ordinary) users allowed to any insight in the malware samples tested? Is it really a _truly_ independent testing organisation we're talking about? Remember, AV-C are paid to test _premium_ (meaning money making product) AV-software. A very descriptive method used in the test would be at its place. I want to know what samples used. What dates and time each samples was tested at. What samples were missed by each vendor? Don't you ask yourself that? These money-making companies paid the tester (AV-C) to do this test, is it not right that we get to know the complete method used? How are we to know that the one that paid the most got the best result?

I'm simply questioning because no one else does. I really appreciate the test results, but doubt the method description used.

I truly hope you see the sanity of my post.

 

Something interesting I just noted is that only the Kaspersky and Symantec products were not compromised at all (i.e, samples were either blocked or user dependent but not compromised).

 

I figured that out yesterday see my previous post

 

Ah, at last, I believe I'm seeing some criticism of the method description!

 

One other thing to remember is that they are not testing zero-day exploits/malware.

 

Sorry, missed that.

 

Im not criticizing the method...

 

AV-C has used every security suite with its default (out-of-the-box) settings. Now while this seems to be the most natural way to test a product, some suites are working always with their max. settings. Avira is well known to have heuristics set to medium "out of the box" therefore that could explain the disappointing results.

Furthermore in other tests run by AV-C, Avira is always tested with its max settings, so why is it different this time?

 

i assume Avira requested it

 

Only users on this forum would go an change settings of an AV product. The vast majority of the population just dont care. In fact for the most part, the only time they even know they have a security product installed is when they see the license expiration pop-up !!!

So I think AV-C's "out-of-the-box" settings test is fully legit. No one cares if Avira MIGHT be able to get better results if settings are maxed out.

 

The biggest finding that comes out of this is that Trend's results from the NSS tests where they always come out #1 is total nonsense.

Come on Trend, when are you going to cook up another NSS #1 Result !!

 

Nobody's arguing about the test being legit or not. It was a simple question addressed to IBK. I do care to know how Avira MIGHT fare with max settings.

 

I think thats a fair question Osaban. The problem is that doing these tests costs IBK a pretty penny I'm sure. These are fairly involved tests, requiring a lot of setup. So I'm not sure who is going to pay for these additional tests if IBK doesn't think they are as important as his primary tests.

 

I'f i'm not mistaken. I think it is the vendors that tell AV-C what product they want to have tested.

For example Avira, they can tell AV-C that they want the Free, Premium or Suite to be tested in the tests, their choice.

And since the Dynamic test is the biggest test, the vendors are very likely to choose their Flagship products to be tested instead of their free version.

If i'm wrong IBK got the answer!