F-Secure Deepguard

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Bob, Jun 28, 2007.

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

    Bob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    49
    Hi,
    I saw on:
    http://www.av-comparatives.org/weblog/index.php
    that:
    DeepGuard blocked with success all the random selected and executed malware based on its behavior, passing the test and winning the “Proactive Protection Award.
    Does this mean 100% detection and a Advanced +++ rating.
    I can't find the figures.
    Bob
     
  2. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    no, it's probably something close to 100%, as for advanced+++ these types of products usually require interactions, even for legit programs (look at kaspersky's proactive defense module, it also got this awards), seeing as these ratings are given by detection rates & FP rate i don't think this can be used in this test.
     
  3. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Here is what you are looking for.
     
  4. Iangh

    Iangh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Posts:
    611
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Given this award am I adding anything to my security by using Boclean as well?

    Superfluous or not?

    Thanks,
    Ian
     
  5. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    IMHO you dont need anything other than f-secure in realtime.
    assuming you have f-secure internet secuirty 2007?
    it may of taken along time to start on my pc but in the past it blocked quite a few trojan downloaders.
    lodore
     
  6. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    yep, this latest test just proved that f-secure is pure power :)

    i still believe it to be the most f-'secure' suite on the market today.

    with slightly better detection than kaspersky and a proactive defense that is not as pop-up hungry and gives better information about the things it finds, instead of computer jargon and accept/deny, this is a great suite.

    yes its uses more ram, yes it takes longer to boot up the machine than kaspersky, buts its more secure, and cheaper!!! and ive had less problems with this than kaspersky, infact... im one of those users who cant use kaspersky because it never really works right, there are a quite a few of us, and nobody seems to know why, kaspersky sure as hell dont.

    anyway, im glad it blocked them all on the test :)
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2007
  7. ako

    ako Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Posts:
    627
    I just cannot disagree! Very powerful, but very convenient to use. What else do we need? (Well, as my signature shows, one can of course be paranoid :)
     
  8. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,038
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    But isn´t this stuff more related to HIPS? I mean SSM can probably also stop all this malware but it will always require user input. I would be really impressed if heuristics would be able to spot malware, I mean if a HIPS gives you an alert you still do not know if software is malicious or not.
     
  9. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    you can set f-secure to ask for user input everytime if you wish,

    but with this you get the built in 99% detection rate, and all the rest what comes with f-secure.
     
  10. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    how do you know the builtin deepguard detection rate/protection rate on default non nagging settings is 99%, IBK likes to set everything to the maximal possible settings ;)
     
  11. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    because deepguard doesnt really have any settings,

    its not like heuristics were some AV's have different settings that will alter its detection,

    you can either have it ask you on everything or ask when fsecure is unclear or or automatic.

    i recommend ask on everything, i will to be in control with what happens :)
     
  12. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    yes, well if it asks on everything it will be annoying, but probably score high, if you leave it on automatic it won't be so annoying, but what about the score, it should be lower, how low who knows, IBK's test doesn't show what settings were used, ask on everything, automatic etc.
     
  13. Abeltje

    Abeltje Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Posts:
    156
    Location:
    Netherlands
    I would really like to know which settings where applied in the test and how "Deepguard" would score in "automatic" mode. Is IBK here? I tried F-Secure and I found it quite annoying in "normal" mode. For example it pop ups when I start "Virtua Tennis" game or I want to uninstall certain applications. I don't think this sort of behavior is acceptable for average users such as my father, he would feel helpless and get annoyed and probably just ignore. So it is vital to know how well the "automatic" mode does!
     
  14. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    f-secure deeepguard is all or nothing im afraid.
    the automatic mode can block stuff you know are safe such as my creative sound card driver a while back.
    or if you tell it to ask on everything it is really really annoying.
    lodore
     
  15. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    yeah but so is kasperskys, its all or nothing.... either it pops up all the time, or you turn it off and turn up all the other settings.

    what f-secures does different, is it at least attempts to make its decisions automatically and asks when needed, also... these require NO user control on automatic, and very little on ask everything.

    but anyway, drweb's in V5 will beat all these with a stick :D
     
  16. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    you are really commited to dr web. what if it doesn't....?
     
  17. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    its called keeping the faith :)

    the programmers have told me its better than kasperskys PDM, they labelled it as 'different' but 'better' - in direct comparison to kasperskys.

    and thats a REALLY BIG statement to make i think.

    only time will tell, but with everything drweb put into their program, 'it just works', this has always been the case.
     
  18. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    how do you know kaspersky won't add anything new to the pdm themselves to make it even better. :)
     
  19. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    haha that old what IF's, what IF drweb add massive detection to counter kasperskys.

    :D

    anyway, back OT ...... DEEPGUARD IS GOOOOOOOOOOD!
     
  20. NAMOR

    NAMOR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Posts:
    1,526
    Location:
    Arkham Asylum

    OT:

    C.S.J, you really should start a Dr.Web blog so other users who don't have the ability/will to obtain inside information can see what's going on with development. haha.:D
     
  21. Abeltje

    Abeltje Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Posts:
    156
    Location:
    Netherlands
    This is not good news. If you read their white paper on "Deepguard" it sounds like it really does everything itself ("artificial intelligence"). I mean, it's easy to just query the user on everything the program does not know itself. I want the program to make the (correct!) decision for me.

    Anyway, I find the automatic mode the only one tolerable. At least you get notified if something is blocked. Let's see how often I encounter something legitimate that gets blocked.

    And of course it would be interesting to know how much of the bad stuff it is still blocked. But I see that no one seems to know how the av-comparatives test was performed.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.