AV-Comparatives Business Security Test 2021 (March – June)

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Minimalist, Jul 16, 2021.

  1. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,382
    Location:
    Slovenia
  2. imdb

    imdb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Posts:
    3,031
    thank you, @Minimalist .
    well done, kaspersky. 0 fp's. :thumb:
    panda, 49 fp's. :eek:
     
  3. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,382
    Location:
    Slovenia
    You're welcome. For me that result is expected :)
     
  4. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    14,385
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I thought it was actually a bit shocking that not one of them got a 100% score in the Real-World Protection Test, they all failed to block at least one sample. And how the heck did Cisco and Sophos perform so bad? Now that I think of it, is there perhaps some more info about this "Real-World Protection Test"?
     
  5. roger_m

    roger_m Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2009
    Posts:
    7,999
    I wouldn't consider that too surprising, considering that no antivirus provides 100% protection. At least, most of the antivirus scored 99% of higher.
     
  6. pernu

    pernu Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2021
    Posts:
    54
    Location:
    Norway
    Maybe if f-secure safe had participated, then maybe they would have managed 100%? ;)
     
  7. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,394
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    You forgot to mention Cybereason that scored lower than both of them.
     
  8. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    14,385
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    This is true, but come on, AV's have become so advanced these days. I would like to see why they failed to block these malware samples, now that would be interesting. Is it perhaps because they are whitelisting too much stuff in order to avoid false positives? Or perhaps their behavior blocking simply isn't extensive enough, that kinda stuff.

    Yes, but it's a lesser known name. Sophos and Cisco are way bigger if I'm correct.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.