av-comparatives news

I thought you were a F-Prot fan?

Are you a horse of many colors?

Best,
Jerry

 

Yes, I read about the 5 reboots per day for 4 years. Without additional specific information, I'll withhold judgement as to whether that was caused by malware. I realize you're probably not in a position to provide that information now, so the discussion is moot and we'll simply have to agree to disagree on this point.

If you've frequented this or other sites for a while, you'll know that frequent reboots caused by system instability can be the result of many factors, including:

• Conflicts involving valid applications. The irony is that the conflicts are often tied to multiple security related programs.
• Corrupt system or key application files. A reinstall can sometimes work wonders.
• A compromised system configuration, caused by many things including deliberate disabling of "unneeded" system services by a user not quite aware of what's really needed and what's superfluous
• Hardware problems - insufficient cpu cooling, disk problems, marginal connections, loose cables and the like.
• Malware infestation
• A whole host of other potential causes....

In this day and age system stability problems are often blamed on malware infestations with little forethought that this is simply one of many equally probable direct causes.

My last use of Norton was a brief use of the 2003 version before I requested a refund after using various versions of NAV for a number of years. In 2003 I could supply germane anecdotal information and opinion to potential users. However, at this point in time, I really can't. In any case, I never had an issue with NAV's detection performance. If NAV doesn't work for you, fine, change products and move on. It doesn't take very long for the information that nonusers like ourselves possess to be severely outdated and essentially irrelevant.

Blue

 

BigC loves Bob Dylan, especially the song: "the times they are a-changin"

 

Yep Bob Dylan is ok, and if you don't change AV's at least ten time a month you are missing out on the fun. But I finally found an av that I really do like. Sav really does work very well. Nothing like norton home versions.

 

Do you mean SAV corporate edition or NAV?

IMO Norton is decent enough as far as detection rate is concerned. Its just the malware cleaning ability of NAV that concerns me, though of course there is no effective test so far to see which AV cleans malware best.

 

I see your point blue but after i run all the av's on it and got rid of all the malware its running spot on no problems at all after all that bad time. so it seems to be fine now. but i now use f-secure internet secuirty 2006.
I used to run with spysweeper shields on but spysweeper is to heavy.
I always use firefox with no script, adblock and since today macfee site advisor.
I have also installed macfee site advisor for IE as well for the rest of my family.
but ever since i found out how infected my old system was i have been really para noied about secuity and malware in genral. so i am now a really safe surfer.

I used to not care what sites I visited.

so in this case its a lesson learned and hope over people can learn from it.

 

Lodore,
And I thought you were an Avira fan??

Best,
Jerry

 

atm I am a avira and kaspersky fan i hope im allowed to be a fan of both

its now down to the wire avira vs kaspersky.

i will wait till the avira secuity suite is out before i decide and thorughly test the avira suite first. like i have with kaspersky

 

Of course you can be a fan of both I have about six I am a fan of

 

SAV not Nav

 

As bigC has already said..., absolutely

The only way to do it - an extended time on your own machine.

As for me..., I'm a NOD32/KAV/F-Prot (v4) fan. All for somwhat different reasons.

Blue

 

where do your statistics come from?

I quote:

Zoo
A threat that exists only in virus and antivirus labs, not in the wild. Most zoo threats never get released into the wild, and as a result, rarely threaten users.
(Norton site)

 

Re: where do your statistics come from?

ITW malware is malware which spreads fast by various means of standard communication like email or messenger or even P2P.

Zoo malware is that which is indeed roaming in the net, but not spreading via standard communication, instead rather getting downloaded by users or being added to some sort of collection.

The risk of getting an ITW infection is 50% more than that of zoo malware IMO. But Zoo malware can indeed threaten anyone at any time. Because Zoo malware can be anywhere, hidden and waiting to get you

 

Re: where do your statistics come from?

What ITW stands for?

 

Re: where do your statistics come from?

ITW = In The Wild

 

Whole point of ITW being so much spread is because it's pushed to users (IM, e-mail) opposed to "zoo" malware which needs to be downloaded via P2P, webpage or some other mean. Otherwise it makes no difference, malware is malware. Do i have to add how many users are looking for cracks where half of those pages are full of driveby crap or heir content (cracks/keygens) are infected or faked to be cracks while they are in fact trojans.

 

Re: where do your statistics come from?

thanks

 

Well, sometimes companies argue that only such content such as cracks and keygens contain this type of "zoo" malware and any user with legitimate software would not touch any cracks or keygens. But sometimes some professionals do indeed download such cracks and keygens to see how they work and function. Some companies even offer rewards for finding possible ways to make the software "crack-proof" (such study requires execution of this kind of software). For that matter, such users are very liable to get infected if no zoo malware was detected at all by AV companies.

Which is why IMO Zoo malware is still malware, and while ITW can be given somewhat higher priority, zoo malware should never be ignored.

 

I see it the same way.

All malware are threats, but like you already said, you have to give it a certain prevalence.

 

Hey,

sorry, my bad ^^.

But for the fast overview, you should write always down such numbers in the online results. In a short way..thx ;-)

What about dialers?

My question is, if you test Avira AntiVir 7 Personal Free instead of Premium, will you get the exact same results in on demand and proactive testing?!

So will you get, Dialers detection excellent, Polymorphe Virus 10 of 10, 99,xx detection rate, etc.?

I think this is an important question..

I'm too, but maybe in future, I will be an Avira fan, too..

So NOD32/KAV/F-Prot (v4 aka 6) and Avira AntiVir..^^

best regards,

iNsuRRecTiON

 

The detection rates for viruses and trojans will remain the same. If you are using the AntiVir Free edition, then you will still have 9x.xx percent of polymorphics detection. Dialer detection will be a bit less than AntiVir Premium, but I don't expect there would be too much difference.

 

Hey,

ok thx.

I hope for an "official" reply/answer from IBK for this ;-)

best regards,

iNsuRRecTiON

 

Well I guess I'm late here since I have just checked out the latest AV-comparatives...

Personally, as a KAV fan from years back, I'm impressed with the test results as well. Kudos for Avira.

However, if I had to change my trusted AV solution in the near future, my eyes would only turn to GDATA AVK

It's a very winner since its inclusion in the tests.

 

Just wanted to ask here, if anyone agrees with the people that claim this is test doesn't truly reflect real life Viruses? These people are of course AVG Free users, who are reacting to the lower scores in these tests compared to other Antivirus Programs. I mean no disrespect to the users of AVG by asking this, as I have used and liked it myself, but it confuses me when I hear about this.