http://virusscan.jotti.org/

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Bitz, Jun 1, 2005.

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

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    What you do with statistics?

    This service is to see if a file contain a virus and after, if is a supiscious file sent that file to the AV companies, right?
     
  2. TopperID

    TopperID Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,527
    Location:
    London
    Not quite right - the samples are likely to be untypical 'cos a lot of putative malware writers like to test their latest efforts by uploading them to see if they get detected!
     
  3. kalpik

    kalpik Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Posts:
    369
    Location:
    Delhi, India
    Hi everyone!

    Scanner Malware name
    AntiVir X
    Avast X
    AVG Antivirus X
    BitDefender HTML.MediaTickets.A
    ClamAV Trojan.Downloader.JS.IstBar.A-2
    Dr.Web X
    F-Prot Antivirus X
    Fortinet X
    Kaspersky Anti-Virus X
    mks_vir X
    NOD32 Win32/Adware.MediaTickets.downloader Application
    Norman Virus Control X
    VBA32 X

    What do u say to this?
    Well u can never say which AV will detect what. And NO AV is perfect!

    Regards,
    Kalpik
     
  4. Bitz

    Bitz Guest

    Kalpik, how long did you have to wait for that one? :D Don't tell me you didnt see at least 10 samples that KAspersky did find and NOd32 didn't.
     
  5. kalpik

    kalpik Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Posts:
    369
    Location:
    Delhi, India
    Hi Bitz!

    Its not that i waited for the particular result! It happens many times! My posting the result does not mean i was trying to show down on KAV.

    Consider the following case:
    If i were to have KAV and suppose that there is only ONE virus out there that KAV does not detect. But if i get infected by that VERY virus, what good is KAV for me?

    My point was that NO AV is perfect. What KAV detects, is based on its definitions, not heuristics. And as far as i believe, heuristic detection is FAR FAR better than detection via definitions. Not that im comparing!! KAV is a VERY good AV no doubt! But as far as i can see, there is no "best" AV.

    Regards,
    Kalpik
     
  6. Bitz

    Bitz Guest

    No AV is perfect that is true. For me Jottis virusscan is IRL, it shows what viruses are out there and infecting computers as we speak. What I react to is the difference between KAV and the other ones. Nod32s heuretics is good but a working uptodate sign def works better IRL as you can see on the page. I wouldnt react if to a difference if it wasnt so avious.
     
  7. kalpik

    kalpik Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Posts:
    369
    Location:
    Delhi, India
    Hi Bitz!

    Hehe nothing more to say! ;)
     
  8. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,218
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Correct. :)

    We should also consider the possibility of people repacking existing malware and uploading them at Jotti's to see which AV detects them (naturally, the AVs with better unpack engine will perform better in this case).
     
  9. Bitz

    Bitz Guest

    True, but in that case it also means that NOD32 is really easy to fool. If some repacking makes the virus invisible to NOD thats even worse.
     
  10. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I wonder who's testing bunch of old stuff on Jotti today. It's like 4 hours and i keep seing old DOS viriis or other older malware.
     
  11. bre

    bre Guest

    This is not good reasoning. Similar would be: what if you get fever and take medicine, but when you get better meteorite hits you in the head and kill you...what good was anti-fever medicine for you?

    So, even from this statistics you can see that you have less chances to be infected with KAV, than with any other listed AV...therefore, to be best possible protected, you install AV with best statistics - KAV, ofcourse :)
     
  12. izi

    izi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Posts:
    354
    Location:
    Slovenia
    KAV detects viruses with signature update and with generic detection.

    From: http://www.viruslist.com/en/analysis?pubid=153595662

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 4, 2005
  13. Don Pelotas

    Don Pelotas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    2,257
    That's a very bad point to make, kalpik. Since no technology covers everything including heuristics, they are nice to have though, for finding new malware to add to the definitions.

    Saying that "heuristic detection is FAR FAR better than detection via definitions", is at best a very entusiastic statement, it would have been nice with a little proff. I do agree that there is no perfect AV for everyone though. :)
     
  14. bre

    bre Guest

    Helloooo...heuristics enthusiasts!

    Do you look at this site before you make comments?

    In real life you have more chances to be protected with KAV than with NOD, even if we agree that NOD has better heuristics.

    Just look frequently on that site and make statistics...no AV offers 100% protection, but with some of them you have more chances to "survive" than with others...and everyone who get statistics from that site can conclude that KAV offers much more overall protection than NOD
     
  15. rodzilla

    rodzilla Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2002
    Posts:
    653
    Location:
    australia
    Heuristic analysis (that is, DECENT heuristic analysis) is a very powerful weapon against new viruses ... 90% success for NOD32 in the recent
    av-comparitives.org retro test ... but it's not 100% perfect and it's not the be-all and end-all of antivirus detection.

    "Signature" scanning CAN be 100% perfect ... but the delay between a new virus appearing on the horizon and the required signature update appearing on your PC can prove fatal.

    According to INDEPENDENT statistics over the past 7 years, most of the time you have a much better chance of survival with NOD32 than with any other antivirus program in the world.
     
  16. rothko

    rothko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Posts:
    579
    Location:
    UK
    from what i have heard, not all the options available in nod32 2.5 are enabled at jotti. scanning for riskware, spyware and dangerous applications are not enabled in NOD.

    i cant confirm this 100%, but can anyone other than the guy who operates jotti.org? and if it's true, then its hardly fair to compare the products based on what happens over at jotti
     
  17. bre

    bre Guest

    And 71% success with Backdoors and Trojans, as well as 62% success with Worms - which gives a lot of space for infection if signature is not put very fast for every new malware arround.

    Can be 100% only if author of malware put signature in the exact the same moment as it let it in the wild...so, you cannot speak about 100%.
    But, if one vendor put signature into base within 15min, only badluck guys will be infected...which is less number than other bad luck guys who will relly on heuristics on product whose base will be updated several hours later...and with NOD heuristics you have 29% chances to miss trojan, for example...if signature for this particular trojan is not put in base for several hours, you will have more chances to "colide" with this trojan with fatal consequences :)
    With KAV, fact is that you have 49% chances (according to that latest test you quote) to miss the same trojan, but within 15 minutes signature will be in base and generally speaking there is less chance for you to collide with this trojan with fatal result...

    We can also speak how good TBAV performed in DOS and early Windows age, but this will not lead us to conclusion that TBAV is good now...so, 7 years statistics could be valid to see how vendor performed in pass...but for this moment protection you should compare existing products in order to evaluate which level of protection is given by any of them
     
  18. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    Even if a vendor adds a signature in 15 minutes it may still be an hour or more before a great number of PCs are updated. Better to have as much zero-hour protection as possible.

    It is good to see AVs like NOD, BitDefender, etc. continue to improve their Heuristic proactive detection rather then just relying upon reactive detection no matter how fast it is.
     
  19. bre

    bre Guest

    There is still no Warhal-worm in the wild, so even with one hour delay you have better chances than if you have to wait several hours for signature, which is now fair enough time for epidemy to spread.
     
  20. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,218
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Well, NOD32 is quite fast in releasing signatures when an outbreak does occur, I remember that recently an update was released for the sole purpose of detecting two new Mytob worms. It was the second update for that day.
     
  21. bre1

    bre1 Guest

    So, mighty heuristics faild and base needed signature? ;)

    Be honest, maybe THAT time NOD base was updated faster than usuall? :)
     
  22. Edwin024

    Edwin024 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    1,008
    I guess you just don't like NOD. Good... that's your perogative then :)
     
  23. Chekow

    Chekow Guest

    It's not about liking or disliking, its about the facts.
     
  24. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    109,572
    Location:
    Texas
    Facts or no facts, Kav users will not convince NOD users and NOD users will not convince Kav users, that their antivirus is the best.

    I suggest users trial and run the antivirus program that they like the most, including any other antivirus programs.
     
  25. dog

    dog Guest

    I totally agree Ron ... when will this ad nausium ever end. :doubt:

    ~Common Sense is still the best protection ... and it will always be~
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  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.