AV-Comparatives: File Detection Test September 2015

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by anon, Oct 15, 2015.

  1. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    4,102
  2. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
  3. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,089
    Thanks for sharing. This test is most relevant for my on-demand-only AV setup. Great result from Avira.
     
  4. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    4,102
    http://blog.avira.com/av-comparatives-file-detection/
     
  5. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,089
    Does prevalence matter? A different approach to traditional antimalware test scoring
    http://blogs.technet.com/b/mmpc/arc...-to-traditional-antimalware-test-scoring.aspx
     
  6. garrett76

    garrett76 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2014
    Posts:
    210
  7. snippits

    snippits Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Posts:
    192
    I find it interesting that 3 out of the bottom 5 are heavy hitters in the business/corporate antivirus industry, and those are Trend, Sophos, and McAfee. I know that the business/corporate versions were not tested here. I am sure that when one or more of these undetected files were executed that either one of the products that I mentioned above could still prevent an infection with behavior analysis or intrusion detection.
     
  8. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,744
    Location:
    New York City
    This approach is working well for Microsoft. They maintain their position from the last
    prevalence test.
     
  9. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    4,102
    Microsoft-prevalence-based analysis of the File Detection Tests - Sept 2015
    http://www.av-comparatives.org/microsoft-prevalence-based-analysis-file-detection-tests/

    The results can be used by editors / media / bloggers etc. for free. Please give as source:
    http://www.av-comparatives.org

    Edit:
    Does prevalence matter? A different approach to traditional antimalware test scoring
    http://blogs.technet.com/b/mmpc/arc...-to-traditional-antimalware-test-scoring.aspx

    Hat tip: Thankful
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2015
  10. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    It all depends if you buy into this regional "prevalence of malware approach." I don't. After all, it's called the "worldwide" web.
     
  11. Cutting_Edgetech

    Cutting_Edgetech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Posts:
    4,953
    Location:
    USA
    Eset's results are not surprising. They have good signature detection, but not great. Avira, and Bitdefender almost always score better by blacklisting signatures. Eset's strength is it's heuristics so it detects most samples it misses when they attempt to execute. I think i'm right anyways. Do they attempt to execute the samples missed after they do an on-demand scan? I have been thinking that they do not all these years, but never bothered to check.

    edited 11/24 @2:57
     
  12. Cutting_Edgetech

    Cutting_Edgetech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Posts:
    4,953
    Location:
    USA
    Why does Emsisoft always score lower in the File Detection test? They are suppose to be using the same signatures. Is there a delay in Emsisoft receiving Bitdefender signatures?
     
Loading...