Emsisoft Anti-Malware & Emsisoft Internet Security 12

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by Mops21, Sep 14, 2016.

  1. Houley456

    Houley456 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Posts:
    167
    Emsisoft....tell me it isn't true....what is happening?
     
  2. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    3,538
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
  3. Umbra

    Umbra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Posts:
    4,354
    Location:
    Europe then Asia
    Those tests are like the weather forecast, one day it is raining, another is sunny...nothing to fret about.
     
  4. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    8,764
    Location:
    Slovenia
    Also switching scale to 0-100% would show how minimal differences are. 96% or 99%? Not a big difference IMO.

    More accurate graphical presentation of results:
    upload_2018-5-16_16-44-8.png
     
  5. cruelsister

    cruelsister Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Posts:
    1,298
    Location:
    Paris
    Umbra- some seem always to need an umbrella...
     
  6. Umbra

    Umbra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Posts:
    4,354
    Location:
    Europe then Asia
    yeah, change one setting and the umbrella may not be needed anymore ;)

    And honestly, what is 0.3% failure when a typical (careful) user will not encounter more than 10-20 malware in his all life... 10 x 0.3% = 0.03 malware? :rolleyes:

    It is why i always considered those tests as...ummmm..."powder to the eyes" (to be polite)
     
  7. Chuck57

    Chuck57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Posts:
    1,474
    Location:
    New Mexico, USA
    Some years back, I followed the tests posted here almost as a religion. Every few months I'd find myself switching to the 'latest and greatest' antivirus/trojan/malware/whatever. A few years ago, I'd had enough. I installed Comodo firewall and set it to proactive. Not many months ago I checked a couple of more boxes - the now famous Cruelsister settings. That's all I use. I still enjoy reading the tests, but only from curiosity.

    *edit* Correction. I also have Win Defender running.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2018
  8. cruelsister

    cruelsister Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Posts:
    1,298
    Location:
    Paris
    Chuck- About WD- so do I. It's too much of a bother to shut it off.

    Umbra- My issue with "Pro" testing has always been this- the lack of diversity in the type of malware samples used (God Forbid they ever use a Scriptor) and the time since initial detection of those samples that are actually used. The fact that so many products get a 95%+ ratings is indicative of the Pro's use of samples D+2 and older (my cat coughs up a hairball every time see sees Pro testing results). The issue here is that any Blackhat that is serious will morph malware every 12 hours, thus making such tests on "legacy" malware totally pointless and invalid.
     
  9. Chuck57

    Chuck57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Posts:
    1,474
    Location:
    New Mexico, USA
    As someone borderline ignorant of most of what Win Defender covers now in Win 10, I leave it alone because once, years ago, I played with a firewall and locked myself out of my own computer.

    In between listening to Marty Robbins, I watch various 'experts' on YouTube test malware, much of which I believe is of dubious vintage (and present company excepted). It's either that right now or nothing, since I'm once again banned from posting on Facebook for a few more days. I take most of it with a grain of salt.
     
  10. Umbra

    Umbra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Posts:
    4,354
    Location:
    Europe then Asia
    I totally agree. AV-tests are marketing tools for vendors, nothing else. Not saying, by just changing the origin/localization of the samples, the unknown AV from who-know-where may beat the top dogs.
     
  11. davisd

    davisd Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2016
    Posts:
    5
    Location:
    Latvia
    Haha, I think everyone of us at least once have locked out ourselves of our own computer while changing router/firewall/user accounts settings. I sometimes still destroy my internet connection when I forget that changing Wifi reception channel on my TP-Link renders it completely inaccessible, unless I reset to defaults. Regular users indeed better to stay with Windows Firewall, experimenting with 3th party Firewalls may sometimes cause more harm then good, but you don't learn if you don't fail.
     
  12. cruelsister

    cruelsister Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Posts:
    1,298
    Location:
    Paris
    Davisd- The suggestion to use Windows firewall is a dangerous one. The lack of Outbound protection at default, as well as the ability of many malware to change/shutdown WF even with complex rules in place makes it almost pointless to use. Whereas WF will be totally oblivious to thinks like malware-forked processes connecting out, just about any other 3rd party firewall will block these silently and totally. A good firewall should be viewed as a powerful malware effect blocker, and sadly this does not seem to be common consensus.

    (ps- I see you are from Latvia- I'll be in Dome Square in Riga in July. The highlight of my year!).

    Umbra- What also revolts me about the Pro testing sites is that with the emphasis is placed on raw detection of malware of indeterminate age this both demeans a quality product that detects and pushes out definitions for new malware quickly, while at the same time inflates a marginal product that may only be efficacious against D+3 samples.
     
  13. lofac

    lofac Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Posts:
    88
    Location:
    .
    Same goes with UAC, which can easily be bypassed.
     
  14. Umbra

    Umbra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Posts:
    4,354
    Location:
    Europe then Asia
    which was never the original purpose of a FW; they were supposed to just block unwanted inbound connections. The rest were added by the industry to make cash.
    Malware prevention isn't the goal of a FW but the one of the anti-malware, if the system is secure, it doesn't need a FW monitoring outbound connections since all outgoing processes are supposed to be safe.

    Anyway, this discussion is not really related to the thread lol
     
  15. cruelsister

    cruelsister Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Posts:
    1,298
    Location:
    Paris
    But I do so love going off on a tangent (one of the reasons why I never spoke on my videos- if I did they would have gone on for hours...).
     
  16. mood

    mood Updates Team

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    Posts:
    4,907
Loading...
  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.