AV Dynamic test 2010 by eKaitse

Sorry, but for example KAV2011 (Kaspersky AntiVirus 2011) that You have tested, hasn't got FireWall nor HIPS nor Sandbox nor Application Control, etc...

I mean "comparation" referring about technologies of detection in tested aplications.

Regards.

 

You dont need a firewall in this kind of test, it does not count.
Anyway I thinkn you are wrong KAV2011 includes the HIPS, the behavior blocker, proactive protection... the sandbox would not count in any dynamic test because it is a manual one.
http://www.kaspersky.com/compare

 

Sorry You are talking about KIS2011 not KAV2011 I know well this comparation and I can tell You that KAV2011 (Kaspersky AntiVirus 2011) hasn't got HIPS nor SandBox, and Yes it has Proactive but not Application Control either ...


Regards.

 

The sandbox of KIS is manual so will not be used in any dynamic test.


http://www.kaspersky.com/compare

A very bad policy limit a paid product IMO.
So if kasperksy does not include the full hips and only a part in KAV the difference will be little.

 

This is what KAV shows that need to be update to become KIS2011. See the screenshot.

Regards.

 

But In general if You test CIS (Comodo InterNet Security)... You might to test the other InterNet Security solutions ... not to test AntiVirus solutions against IS solutions, don't mind if freeware or paid ...

I would like to see the same test but with Comodo AntiVirus, not CIS ...

Regards.

 

Prevencion the intrusiones, is to avoid the net attacks.
Control the aplicaciones must be the improved HIPS
Modo seguro must be the manual sandbox (not used in a dynamic test)

If the only real difference for a dynamic test is the improved HIPS the results wouldn't change that much.

Anyway to do it better they should have tried to include the best product of each brand. You are right.

 

please always test apples with apples........

but im sure comodo can be always the strogest
at the moment

 

I didn't mean win7 x64. I'm also using win7 x64 but sandbox is limited for Windows XP 64bit only

 

Have you actually used KAV and KIS? The difference is larger than you might think (although signature and heuristic detection still makes for the most of the blocked threats I think).

20% is still a lot of dynamic FPs.

I think these dynamic tests should include testing not only with malware, but also usability tests with a lot of clean applications.

 

i agree. it makes a lot of sense to test detection of legitimate threats as well as FP rate. a product with excellent detection and hiiiiiiiiideous FP rates (OH LOOK, EVERY APPLICATION ON YOUR PC IS MALWARE OMG) won't be nearly as attractive to someone as a product with great detection and a manageable level of FPs.

 

haha... comodo is playing with a Suite , and the other ones are just Antivirus, no firewall, hips .. and other important options, would be interesting to test CIS vs NIS, ESS, KIS, BIS, Gdata IS, F-secure IS and the other big AVs

This test seems to be a matousec test xD ..
nothing good and constructive of it

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2369897,00.asp

Comodo Antivirus 5.0 Review. (Not full CIS).

 

Hi LagerX / Lord Ami. You assume correctly. I can't read Estonian.
Fortunately, Google Chrome does.

 

Okay, okay. I really should have written,
"If everything that isn't whitelisted is sandboxed by default or every D+ alert is blocked, how could you not stop 100%."

You assume incorrectly though. I have been using CIS 5 on a redundant PC for.. well over a week now! Having been encouraged by 'Technical' to trust that the latest CIS version would not eat my children, I took the plunge.

Again, 100% result in this test doesn't surprise me. Nor does it excite me! Too many FPs.