AV-Comparatives: Real-World Protection Test – April 2018

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by anon, May 15, 2018.

  1. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    6,133
  2. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    4,563
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    Emsisoft continues to disappoint.

    Looks like its successful quest for low FP's is taking its toll.
     
  3. Azure Phoenix

    Azure Phoenix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    Posts:
    1,125
    The version tested was 2018.3
     
  4. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    12,952
    Location:
    Here
    Avira and McAfee did great. 100% blocked and 0 FPs :thumb:
     
  5. bigwrench9

    bigwrench9 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Posts:
    125
  6. gery

    gery Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Posts:
    2,087
    Bullguard not good:(:(:(
     
  7. ance

    ance formerly: fmon

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    1,327
    Windows Defender :thumb:
     
  8. Cutting_Edgetech

    Cutting_Edgetech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Posts:
    5,536
    Location:
    USA
    I was thinking the same thing. I have not used Emsisoft in a long time, but I saw post mentioning changes that were being made to the BB in order to get false positives down. I thought to myself that the BB would likely miss many threats if the BB becomes too lenient. I hope they find the right balance soon.
     
  9. Cutting_Edgetech

    Cutting_Edgetech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Posts:
    5,536
    Location:
    USA
    I'm shocked McAfee got a perfect score! They have been performing horrible for several years now.

    Edited: 5/15/18 @ 1:14
    Congrats to McAfee for such a huge improvement! I don't know what you did, but keep up the good work. I'm guessing better management.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2018
  10. Fabian Wosar

    Fabian Wosar Developer

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Posts:
    838
    Location:
    Germany
    The reduction of FPs had absolutely nothing to do with this. Over the last three months, we gradually rolled out new infrastructure for our behaviour blocker as part of the monthly feature updates. We decided to introduce this new tech gradually as to avoid headaches when switching everything at once. In addition, just the infrastructure on its own had major benefits like fixing several long-standing compatibility issues with products like Kaspersky, Avast, AVG and some other products, that rendered systems unusable as no process could be started on systems running both EAM and their product in real-time.

    The rollout itself was pretty smooth and we didn't see anything unusual in our telemetry or continuous daily testing either. However, it turned out that there was a rare race condition with certain malware obfuscators that caused some 32-bit processes to not be monitored correctly on Windows 10 64-bit systems. AV-C did report the issue to us as part of their normal report at the end of March and we fixed and released it as an update during the 2018.3 lifecycle, but by then we already had racked up a couple of misses in the April test period as well.

    It is true that we did reduce the false positive rate considerably over the last months. However, those were achieved by improving our cloud systems and none of the misses this year were caused by our cloud accidentally flagging a behaviour based detection as a false positive.
     
  11. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    12,952
    Location:
    Here
    I was positively surprised also.
     
  12. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    4,563
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    @Fabian Wosar

    Thanks for the explanation :)
     
  13. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    12,491
    Location:
    The Netherlands
  14. ance

    ance formerly: fmon

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    1,327
    One test good, another test bad - nothing new for me. :thumb:

    SE Labs sounds like homemade test, maybe it's time for a "fmon security labs" test. :doubt:
     
  15. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    12,491
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Actually, it's probably because they use more zero day samples according to some. Malware that has been in the wild is of course more easy to spot.
     
  16. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    6,133
    https://www.av-comparatives.org/com...=2018&chart_month=4&chart_sort=1&chart_zoom=3
    -------------------
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2018
Loading...
  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.