AV-Comparatives Test Overview - May 2005

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Alantir, May 26, 2005.

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

    controler Guest

    I looked over the comparatives site & this thread but didn't see if all scanners had all options set to high? Also were all samples unpacked?

    Reason I am asking is someone said F-Prot has no unpacking.

    controler
     
  2. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
    Well I looked at NOD32 as well as Kav. Both of them had problems so I am still confused as before I started this journey to find an AV that I can feel confident in recommending to friends and clients.
     
  3. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,886
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    I do not think that you looked carefully over the comparative site, as the answers to your questions are written there quite often and are probably also included in the document with the FAQ.
     
  4. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,251
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    If you had problems with NOD32 and KAV, try something else! BitDefender is a good place to start.........;):D
     
  5. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg

    Actually I already tried BitDefender, at least the free version a while back and I found that it was a resource hog on a slower test machine I have.
     
  6. controler

    controler Guest

    IBK

    I was making a statement more then anything.

    Since F-prot did well, this would mean no unpacking , since it was you that replied in another post of mine as to why f-prot didn't see a nasty on Jotti site.

    You said f-prot had no unpacking or unzipping and more or less said since a nasty can't do any harm unless unpacked, that is why they didn't detect it. At least that is how I took it.

    I will eventualy go back and look through the site to see the mention of how high things were set & or if they used anything packed, zipped archived ect.

    controler
     
  7. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,886
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    You maybe misunderstood me then. i said 'password protected archive' as possible reason why fprot did not picked it up at jotti.

    F-Prot has unpacking and unarchiving. dunno if jotti has set fprot to scan also packed and archivied samples for fprot, i think yes.

    Anyway yes, as long as it is in a password protected zip file in an eml file it is harmless, when it comes to be harmful (decrypting and executing the file) fprot would most probably detect it.

    on my comparatives set you see that all scanners are set to use the best possible settings and that all files are unarchivied. But of course not unpacked.
    Archives are like e.g. ZIP, RAR, ACE, TAR, etc.
    Packers are e.g. UPX, Aspack, etc.
     
  8. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,024
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    But the engine in F-Prot does not include any Runtime Unpackers.

    The "better detection of executable packers" with the new engine in the latest versions only refers to the extraction of compressed archive files.
     
  9. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,886
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    removed by me (due confusing nonsense).
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2005
  10. siggia

    siggia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Posts:
    3

    Actually F-prot handles around 44 runtime packers and we add new ones as we find them.
     
  11. iwod

    iwod Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    708
    Sorry, but you sounds like you are from Frisk?

    Any news on F prot 4....... :D
     
  12. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,024
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Very good to hear. But it must have been a fairly recent addition as there were, according to Frisk support, no runtime unpackers in version 3.16 when it first appeared.

    Which version were these added?
     
  13. siggia

    siggia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Posts:
    3
    Some went in 3.15 but most off them have been going in after 3.16.
    hmm could you send me an email to siggia@f-prot.com who said that from our support so I can go and correct them.
     
  14. Happy Bytes

    Happy Bytes Guest

    :D no comment :D

    Be gentle please :D
     
  15. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,024
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    I have found the relevant email and will send it to you as suggested.

    I hope no one gets into trouble!!!!!!
     
  16. siggia

    siggia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Posts:
    3
    They wont get into trouble :) Just want to make sure they know that we handle this.
     
  17. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,024
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Email sent.

    And good to see someone from F-Prot here. Hope you stick around.
     
  18. controler

    controler Guest

    I second that black C\
    I sure don't want to get hit by the wet noodle :D

    con
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  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.