AV-Comparatives Firewall Test 03/2014

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by FleischmannTV, Mar 30, 2014.

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

    FleischmannTV Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,071
    Location:
    Germany
    Report:

    -http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/avc_fw_201403_en.pdf
     
  2. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,085
    Is the methodology relevant at all to measure the security of a FW?
     
  3. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    localhost
    Weird that Comodo was not tested...o_O
     
  4. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I'm sure it would pass with flying colors. I just find it funny that so callled "better" firewalls that you have to pay for failed compared to free and pre-installed Windows Firewall. What's the point of paying for it if it does worse lol.
     
  5. Inside Out

    Inside Out Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2013
    Posts:
    421
    Location:
    Pangea
    Chip says G-Crap ended up at the dead last even though they were supposed to pull out and its results didn't appear:

    Link

    Too embarrassing to show? Expected of people not fit to work at McDonalds, let alone develop a supposedly "industry-leading" AV.

    ~Personal comment removed~
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 30, 2014
  6. Joxx

    Joxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,128
    so Comodo failed and pulled out
    dear oh dear

    and Online Armor...
     
  7. Inside Out

    Inside Out Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2013
    Posts:
    421
    Location:
    Pangea
    Except their devs have at least two brain cells to rub together unlike those of G-Fail. Not to mention they don't bribe on AV-Test.
     
  8. Antarctica

    Antarctica Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Posts:
    1,620
    Location:
    Canada
    Yeah, always believed OA was good.o_O I am using it on my Laptop, so maybe I should consider just using Windows Firewall.
     
  9. Cutting_Edgetech

    Cutting_Edgetech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Posts:
    4,953
    Location:
    USA
    I'm still looking into the methodology used with these test. At a brief glance it appears they only tested certain aspects of what a FW should do, but neglected to test everything else. Did they test outbound access request at all?
     
  10. Joxx

    Joxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,128
    that was not on the table

    they tested a particular scenario
    and the fails from well established products are
    shocking
    inexcusable

    I'm using Comodo and believed I was
    impermeable

    I was lied to
    and I'm upset
     
  11. zerotox

    zerotox Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Posts:
    417
    I think it comes again to what have been discussed at Wilders in the past - turning a firewall into a firewall with HIPS, etc. sometimes results into not being able to do firewall's main task (which the built-in firewall does exactly) - filter packets at network level (not simply per application basis) and keep your system from being accessed without your authorization. What use is outbound if your system is compromised and your firewall cannot defend it from inbound attacks. And someone will say well, they won't be able to steal your precious info, phone back home. But if your firewall doesn't do its main job - keep your system form inbound attacks, what makes you think it will keep you from outbound leakage. And a firewall of course is as good as the rules defined for it to follow.
     
  12. Cutting_Edgetech

    Cutting_Edgetech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Posts:
    4,953
    Location:
    USA
    This test only tested very few functions that a firewall should serve. It would be unscientific to use this test to define the overall effectiveness of a Firewall. To use this test as some sort of proof that a Firewall is no good makes no scientific sense. The test is way too limited. If you test the products that did well in this test how effective they are at performing other functions a firewall should perform they may not do well. This Firewall test only points out some weak areas that should be addressed.
     
  13. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,088
    Interesting results. Some great FWs that have good results at Matousec (they test mainly outbound control) have failed at basics - inbound control. I have been considering to use ESS again, but I guess I will stay with EAV and Windows Firewall.

    hqsec
     
  14. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,085
    Matousec has nothing to do with a firewall test, matousec test are only about the HIPS component.
     
  15. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,088
    Yes, that was kind of my point. Some firewalls have created great HIPS and other components but forgot about firewall's basic protections.

    hqsec
     
  16. Seven64

    Seven64 Guest

    Online Armor has been neglected by Emsisoft. Not surprising.
    Their main interest is EAM.
     
  17. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    What's weird is that BullGuard, AVG and Avast all have firewalls containing Agnitum technology and they all did better than Outpost itself. This might indicate Outpost just has an internal configuration issue that may be rectified soon.
     
  18. FreddyFreeloader

    FreddyFreeloader Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2013
    Posts:
    527
    Location:
    Tejas
    If my machine is behind a router firewall, is any of this relevant?
     
  19. siketa

    siketa Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2012
    Posts:
    2,697
    Location:
    Zagreb, Croatia
    No, avast dropped Agnitum technology.
     
  20. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,085
    is avast using now an internal develop fw?
     
  21. FleischmannTV

    FleischmannTV Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,071
    Location:
    Germany
    The report is about a scenario where you are in a public network and need protection from other members of that network.
     
  22. FreddyFreeloader

    FreddyFreeloader Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2013
    Posts:
    527
    Location:
    Tejas
    I see tests run in both private and public networks.
     
  23. siketa

    siketa Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2012
    Posts:
    2,697
    Location:
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Yes....but I'm not sure if they have developed it completely on their own or it's more like a front-end for Win FW....Rejzor could answer to this.....
     
  24. FleischmannTV

    FleischmannTV Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,071
    Location:
    Germany
    I see, but in both scenarios it's about protection from other members of the same network. I guess, when you were talking about your router and its firewall, you had intrusion attempts from outside your network in mind?
     
  25. Feandur

    Feandur Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Posts:
    401
    Location:
    Australia
    A common result for both Matousec and Chip -

    Kaspersky Internet Security 2014 does well.

    Outpost is still good at the inbound ping test.....
    Can remote desktop / assistance be turned off in Services?

    -cheers,
    feandur
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.