File-Detection Test September 2012

the File-Detection Test. Please find it here:


http://www.av-comparatives.org/comp...ion-test/238-file-detection-test-october-2012

 

the result of webroot is disappointing.....
everyone else, continue with the same result as expected..

 

Good result by trend micro & McAfee, quite a surprise.

 

AhnLab, Microsoft and PC Tools - start pushing the updates already and work on the heuristics/behavioural detection! These are good products hindered by niggles like these.

Good job from AVG, McAfee, AVIRA and Trend Micro. Dunno what's up with Webroot.

It's interesting to compare with AV-Test's results; some products seem to have quite variable performance.

 

After seeing this test,i guess it will be an "explosion" of those who will change their AV...or not?

 

That's an understatement

I've not read through the whole report as yet,but a detection rate miles behind the other tested products and "crazy many" FPs;it seems to be a shockingly bad display from them.

 

detection below 80%*

"*Results and misses have been confirmed with several tests and also by the vendor. Even two weeks after the
test-date, the detection rate was still lower than 80%. Also a representative set ofmisses was sent for peer-review to an independent party."

as viewed on test result;maybe another bug

 

There has to be some reason for such an abysmal result as this,I can't believe that WSA has become that bad.

 

AhnLab has a cloud of their own too, by the way. Take note they are based in Korea.

 

but remember, after those plus 20 percent of missed samples try to run, WSA isolates them and then months later, disinfects them after they determine they are malicious.

Anyway, nope this test isnt causing me to change, but I will say hats off to Trend Micro and my sleeper for next year, McAfee

 

Trend Micro is 2nd? You have got to be kidding me.

 

shocking result by WSA

 

i always trusted this German software.. Avira.. now i know why i did !

 

i was surprised too

 

Really awful performance by Webroot. FPs continue to plague them even though they insist they don't.
Congrats to Avira for an excellent performance.

 

Even more so, if those samples tried to run, we'd have a dramatically higher detection rate. This is just an on-demand test which doesn't take into account any of our additional detection methods which occur in realtime, so I'm not terribly surprised at the score. I haven't looked at what the false positives were but that's the more surprising part of the score as it's been almost completely silent regarding FPs for quite some time from my perspective. I suspect these are over unpopular applications but I'll be taking a closer look shortly.

 

and congrts to BullGuard. As good as results as Kaspersky.

 

I have been aware of their products for several years now. Good products IMO but I always found it a little costly for my tastes (international market).

 

IMO if a product receives even a "standard" rating in an AV-comparatives test, it is probably good enough to protect an average computer. AVG was "standard" rated for many years (it only recently started improving), and I have never had a case of infection or any complaints about it's ability to protect me on the internet. That's why I feel (despite the differences the test may show) that each certified product from AV-C in the real world is very close to the next one.

 

I wonder why webroot still wants to participate to this test as it does not reflect the real on access detection of the software. Better to withdraw from it than risking their reputation and image unnecessarily. Other AV companies did the same (e.g. Norton).

 

I agree. The only benefit to Webroot is the test points out FPs Webroot may have.

 

Perhaps they're willing to be the dark knight... "Why are they chasing bashing him daddy?" "Because he can take it."

 

yes,is better webroot think about withdraw av comparative test...because that can change their reputation, and costumer "view" of a company.

Because every time a test comes with result's, there's always a explanation about result..sometimes a bug, another time a problem with cloud connection...for average user that is not a good publicity and can confuse some costumer's.

 

Right.

 

A couple points about the on- demand test and Webroot of which I currently own a license and am using.
1. Users selected the on-demand test as their most important test according to the latest security summary performed by AV-Comparatives.
2. Why does Webroot rave about the speed of their scan when , by their own admission, on-demand scanning is not the strength of their program and is sub-par as evidenced by this latest test?