Discussion in 'Prevx Releases' started by claudiu, Oct 9, 2012.
Congratulation Webroot for being "Tested" in the latest AV Comparatives, Oct2012!
Yet people who are more intelligent and educated on security than you still use it for good reasons despite the test being incapable of simulating reality.
Does that frustrate you?
"Why Smart People Are Stupid"
So the smart people answer confidently and incorrectly, and when corrected, they can see where they made their mistake. While the stupid people can't figure out the answer at all, ask questions, and when explained to them, they still can't figure it out and ask the same questions again.
Sounds about right.
So again, does it frustrate you?
"So again, does it frustrate you?"
To be honest, yes!
As a stupid I bought 5 licenses for WSA, good for 5 years;that confirms "Smart People Are Stupid"
Have you had any problems with WSA letting threats through?
Are any of those machines infected?
Webroot didn't get no where close to the results I would have liked to have seen, but at least they are being tested now. They have taken a step in the right direction. Does AV comparatives just scan the samples or do they actually try executing them also to see if the samples are detected by heuristics? WSA has never been great about detecting malware by just scanning samples without them being executed. Regardless, i'm not trying to make any excuse for their poor test results because I would prefer malware be detected without it actually being executed. Sometimes it's just too late after malware has been executed to stop it even if it is detected by heuristics upon execution. Its much safer to detect it before execution, and block access to the file before execution.
The latest test was an on-demand scan afaik the real world tests do execute the samples I believe.
I am running WSA on all five of my systems, and I have installed WSA on two dozen or so client systems in the last few months. Not one of these systems have ever been infected with any detectable malware.
The same cannot be said for the dozens of systems running other security software that I have disinfected this year. The last time I mentioned the names of the "other" security software vendors it resulted in the usual weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth P ), so I ain't doing that again.
Off topic post removed. Focus on the software.
i couldn't care less whether or not an on-demand scan of a folder full of malware yields poor results. the WSA product has proven itself in other, more relevant third party tests.
i've deployed WSA on a number of customers' machines, many of whom are habitually bad at using the internet, and somehow, their machines have remained clean. go figure that it does well when used as intended, rather than being used to scan a testing organization's malware collection
these "the sky is falling" posts after every test release make my head hurt.
Logic has no place here!
IBK stated the malware was executed.
I actually got a PM from the member who started this post a couple of hours ago pointing to the fact I seem to be following 'Joe' & 'TH' blindly along with an enclosed link - You have made your point Claudiu & you are entitled to it but when you resort to sending private messages to people (me) to further your cause & to start a post regarding an subject that already has a running thread using plain sarcasm you are without any doubt a troll, & a troll who has problems...
'A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject'
- Sir Winston S Churchill
In the so called "dynamic" test, not this one
Oh no , this guy again
They didn't execute the malware in this particular test. They do in some of their other test.
Hum, that explain in part why Webroot doesn't get the real score,
If I well remember from the PC mag review, in order to save up computer resource, WSA eat the malware when it executed and not on access...
Correct me if a make a error
Separate names with a comma.