AV-Comparatives Results - Nov 2007 Retrospective/ProActive Test

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by C.S.J, Nov 30, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    nice one drweb,

    39%

    only 1% off an advanced+ rating for detection :)
     
  2. n8chavez

    n8chavez Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Posts:
    2,302
    Location:
    Location Unknown
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    Explain to me how that works because BitDefender only got standard too. Are you sure 40% was the threshold for Advanced+?
     
  3. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    yep 40% for advanced+, IBK said so.
     
  4. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    New York City
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    They got knocked down because of FPs.
     
  5. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,818
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    FALSE POSITIVES! please read the report.
     
  6. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    New York City
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    Eset - 71% with NO FPs, VERY impressive!!
     
  7. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    yep, as expected.

    well ... i expected maybe 1 or 2 fps from them.

    still the same problem with drweb, false positives.

    35 is too much, but not the highest :)

    and the detection is a good improvement, just 1% from the advanced+ target, 6th place sounds ok.

    now they just have to work on their signature detection and false positives.

    especially when 18/35 (if i counted correctly) Were SIGNATURE false positives
     
  8. Dark Star 72

    Dark Star 72 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    Posts:
    703
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    Nod first - the rest nowhere!
     
  9. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,719
    Location:
    Texas
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    Let's avoid turning this thread into a comparison argument.
     
  10. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    nod32 is 'expected' to do well on this test, their overrall detection relys on it.

    but still, impressive as always for them on this test. :)


    ------------
    6/7 standard ratings would have scored a higher rating if not for False Positives *sigh*

    bit worrying

    a 9% increase for drweb, surely this was the .origin detections.

    now, we just need to see this same improvement for signature detections :D
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2007
  11. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    New York City
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    Symantec continues its tradition of few FPs. Nice to see its scan speed as 'Fast'.
     
  12. JasSolo

    JasSolo Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Posts:
    414
    Location:
    Denmark
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results


    Could'nt agree more, Symantec is nowhere near as bad, as many people still think/says. I'm still using another AV, though :D
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2007
  13. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results

    Looks like Kaspersky just barely got the Advanced+ @ 40%.

    And I continue to be impressed with NOD32's heuristics and low FP. Hopefully the other AV can improve to lowering their FPs.
     
  14. nodyforever

    nodyforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Posts:
    549
    Location:
    PT / Lisbon
    Re: Av-Comparatives Results


    :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:


    very good, the best NOD32 antivirus :)
     
  15. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    oh no,

    not another 'the best' :rolleyes:
     
  16. dah145

    dah145 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2006
    Posts:
    262
    Location:
    n/a
    Good to see KAV got Advanced +! :)
     
  17. Wordward

    Wordward Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Posts:
    707
    How about some props for AVG AM? Big improvement huh? And what about Avast? No heuristics and it still did an admirable job. Plus I understand the free version of Avast is very close to the Pro, and best or not, I'd feel secure enough with Avast Home. I must say however that both Kaspersky and Nod have stepped up their game.
     
  18. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    I thought fanboys were supposed to understand each other?
     
  19. JasSolo

    JasSolo Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Posts:
    414
    Location:
    Denmark
    LOL, we don't know yet, but it seems to go that way though....Sorry Chris, but DR.Web seems far away still....:D
    By the way, what happened to you and F-Secure? Sorry for being nosy...just courious :)

    Cheers
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2007
  20. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i changed back this morning, i missed the doctor too much :)

    good result for you though, as always for the retro :thumb:
     
  21. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Yet again, avast! surprises with it's results. In a very positive way. :D
    Good job ALWIL. Also congrats to Kaspersky team, they really improved their engine significantly.
     
  22. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    kaspersky got lucky :)

    kaspersky was only 111 samples over the 40% Advanced+ target.

    jammy :p
     
  23. Sjoeii

    Sjoeii Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,240
    Location:
    52?18'51.59"N + 4?56'32.13"O
    The Doctor is going up!!!
     
  24. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    only proactively.

    they need to apply the same 9% increase to their signature detection before improvements can be shown nationwide.

    319 short of Advanced+ (detection wise) grrr

    once again FP's an issue though, but this seems to be the case with many others aswell, i expected a big amount from drweb due to the new technology being tested, hopefully they can fix that in the next 6 months till next and hopefully reach that LITTLE push towards Advanced+ for this retro test.

    im sure Drweb will be happy about this, however... they need to work (seriously) on signature detection and sort out the FP's.

    are they going to do this?... i dont know.

    they have gone very quiet after the MARX test, no replies. .... the word shame comes to my mind, but i HOPE they grab the problem by the balls, and fix it.

    :D
     
  25. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    They need to hire mode Zbodnovs. I think they are just being stubborn/stuck with their policy. If I remember correctly, they don't analyze samples they receive from tests/etc. at all if one single garbage file is found.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.