Behaviour and REAL protection with various AVs in REAL environment

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Windfresh, Jan 11, 2008.

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

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    Here you can see the results of healing infested computers by company Fomsoft http://www.antivirus.ru/AntiVirPS712.html ,which is specialised in recovering lost data, curing infested machines and all the services connected with PC health.
    Some more tests http://www.antivirus.ru/VirAnaliz.html
    http://www.antivirus.ru/VirAnalizB.html
    Dangerous post card test http://www.antivirus.ru/VirAnalizD.html
    http://www.antivirus.ru/VirAnalizA.html
    Only REAL viruses and threats,which are TRULY perilous for PCs and found on the infested machines were submitted to VirusTotal. This is a retrospective of the real picture how this or that antivirus dealt with REAL, harmful malware.
    You can use either http://babelfish.altavista.com/ or http://www.online-translator.com/srvurl.asp?lang=en (which offers much better level of translation-recommended)to translate the pages from Russian into English.
    The results are separated into months and the annual result is presented.
    I stress that it is not a test a-la AV-Comparatives, but a mere constatation of the real picture of how AVs are able to solve true computer infection.Only real environment,battle situation.
    It is noteworthy that this results more or less coincide with those, given on http://winnow.oitc.com/AntiVirusPerformance.html , that in my opinion shows which AVs do thier work well.
     
  2. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma

    Attached Files:

  3. Windfresh

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    It is more that strange-I use Opera browser too and fradulent sites checking is enabled, but no indication.
    Antivirus.ru is an official site of a reputed company,specialized in recovering data.
    Try to translate it via http://www.online-translator.com/srvurl.asp?lang=en
    I think it is just an unsavoury misunderstanding.
     
  4. Windfresh

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    Has just checked with my Opera browser.
    Here what it says:

    Opera has no information about the current site. It is not on the blacklist of suspected fraud sites, and it has not been verified by a trusted third party.

    Please report this site if you believe it should be blacklisted.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 25, 2008
  5. LoneWolf

    LoneWolf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,408

    I too use Opera and get no warnning. Hmmmmm. o_O
     
  6. larryb52

    larryb52 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Posts:
    1,126
    this thread isn't headed anywhere & the info looks questionable I hope a mod would look at this & delte if necessary...
     
  7. Windfresh

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    Isn't it interesting to see what all these antiviruses are worth in REAL situationo_O:eek: or bigc73542 just wanted to lure us astray from discussing a serious ,indeed, subject.
    I ask the moderator to remove bigc73542 nwarning as irrelevant, cuse it misleads and frightens visitors.
     
  8. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    I get the same warning when visiting the translation site, bigc is not trying to mislead or frighten visitors of anything.
     
  9. ProSecurity

    ProSecurity Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Posts:
    123
    I don't understand why a regular user would be eager to see a thread deleted.o_O
    Shouldn't the concern come solely from a moderator?
     
  10. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    SiteAdvisor gave it a green light. However the translation part didn't translate too well for me.
     

    Attached Files:

  11. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I personally have the utmost respect for bigc and feel if anything needs deleting, IT IS YOU.:mad:
     
  12. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i dont think there is anything dodgy with the link bigc, it seems to be an opera FP.

    after checking the results, its nice to see drweb once again scoring 'extremely high' on all the tests, on these real-world threats, its also quite disturbing how some are really quite awful!

    a few screenshots to all who might now be afraid from checking the results, due to Opera.

    5.jpg

    1.jpg

    2.jpg

    3.jpg

    4.jpg

    maybe the OP should have posted them like this, its a pain in the butt to translate different pages.

    interesting find though, TY.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2008
  13. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    past months results........ which includes JAN 2008.


    6.jpg

    1# Drweb
    2# Kaspersky
    2# Webwasher
    3# Ikarus
    4# F-Secure
    5# Antivir
    6# Sophos
    7# Bitdefender
    8# AVG
    9# VBA
    10# Panda
    11# NOD32
    12# Microsoft
    12# Fortinet
    13# esafe
    14# Quickheal

    the rest i just cant be bothered adding ;)
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2008
  14. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    ok, the obvious question I have, and it isnt because of Aviras ranking but, ClamAV. These tests have to be including false positives for such a detection ranking by this AV. Wouldnt you agree or am I missing something.
     
  15. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    actually over the year, clamav didnt even make the top 14 that i could be bothered to post.

    but maybe clamav is improving, it also scored a very poor result on that shadowserver test over the year, but lately it scores well on there too.
     
  16. Wordward

    Wordward Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Posts:
    707
    AVG did well, and was very close to BitDefender. Also it apparently did so without the Ewido detection.
     
  17. Diver

    Diver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,444
    Location:
    Deep Underwater
    Its always so amazing how well Russian AV's do on Russian tests. Bring me another bowl of borscht. Its good for you.
     
  18. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    The Russian avs are the best,

    Another person dismissing tests because 'your' av is not at the top, the same was said for anti-malware.ru, but that is just crazy.
     
  19. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    It's also quite amazing to see people rush to defend AV tests they've only heard of for the first time because 'their' AV was a top scorer.

    I think I'll have a bowl as well. :D
     
  20. TVH

    TVH Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    Posts:
    227
    False positives are not taken into account in these tests so slow and extremely aggressive engines have good detection results. This is why software like Ikarus, webwasher, drweb etc do so well.

    Overall, kaspersky seems to be the best AV - it is consistantly ranked highly in the majority of AV tests. This is coming from a nod32 user.
     
  21. Windfresh

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    Why not read the explanation for the methodics of the tests first before ranting of FP.
    False positives infected machineso_O You yourself understood what you said?All the malware were samlped from infested machines,brought by consumers to be repaired after they had lost their data.
    Only REAL threats were submitted to VirusTotal,so no false positives.
     
  22. Windfresh

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    :) Easy,boy,easy.Otherwise your bloodpressure will soar.Don't split with fury
     
  23. TVH

    TVH Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    Posts:
    227
    The point im trying to make is that ordinary home users may be misguided by those results as although it is clear that the top ranked av's in the test have great detection rates, they throw up countless numbers of FP's in real life situations which could result in the average user deleting files that may not actually be infected.

    Therefore, the results aren't reliable.
     
  24. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    In this test, it was real malware only.

    As for fps, they were not tested, it shows avs that missed infections and also the speed of signature adding on the new

    Sure, a user can say their av has 99% detection according to
    av-comp or whatever, but this just shows it doesn't match up to the real threats that are circling.

    Personally I prefer to be protected against the real threats on the net, rather than sing and dance about a so-called 99% detection rate.

    Also I find it quite interesting that ppl label drweb as the agressive fp
    machine, nobody seems to label fprot as that on here, and thier new technology was not even tested
     
  25. Solaris

    Solaris Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    54
    So, for January, Ikarus has a good score.
    The T3 engine still in development; I have high expectations of this antivirus.:thumb:

    If only they could make a little effort into the interface and options available.:thumbd:
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.