largest database

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by waters, Aug 8, 2005.

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

    waters Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Posts:
    934
    Antivir now has 200054 in virus database.
    Is this the largest?.It seems antivir and bit defender have had massive updates recently.
    This is antivir free,so with the paid version having spyware detection,does it have a different database to cover spyware.
     
  2. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    It's not the number that matters. You can have huge database just because you have lousy unpacker and you need hundred signatures for same file.
    Also companies count malware differently...
     
  3. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    High numbers sell better :rolleyes: (Sorry for being sarcastic)
     
  4. waters

    waters Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Posts:
    934
    So antivir has large database because it has useless unpacker
     
  5. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Well their unpacker isn't the best under the sun,but yeah that can be one of the resons. Another can be the way how they count malware (1 signature for 1 family,1 signature for 1 sample,5 signatures for 1 exotic re-packed sample... etc)
     
  6. hbkh

    hbkh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Posts:
    128
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    Here's an example Avast's database is only 39894 (as of today), but it has equal if not better detection than Antivir. Those numbers are meaningless... As stated already they are a pure marketing tactic. ;)
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2005
  7. waters

    waters Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Posts:
    934
    Av comparatives test should be interesting then.Both antivir and bit defender have added 100,000 extra since last test.
     
  8. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    I see no relation between the doubled virus records and the detection rates. I also still ask myself why the numbers increased that much. Maybe really only a marketing thing, who knows....
     
  9. waters

    waters Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Posts:
    934
    Maybe then ,if there is no relation between the two,it would be interesting to ask the companies why they are spending the time and effort doing this ,when the time could be spent in other ways
     
  10. chaos16

    chaos16 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,004
    kaspersky has a huge database does that mean there unpaker is crap??

    coz kaspersky has the best detection compared to all other antivirus
     
  11. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    Each scanner has a different total of "Scanned Objects" also.
    I tested this in the past and the differences are very big.
    I don't think that's important as long the scanner does its job.

    You can easily fool a counter in a program or show a different result on the screen. If that would the case of course.
    Let us assume that all these numbers are correct.
    Different programmer = different counting.
     
  12. .....

    ..... Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Posts:
    312
    Nope, Kaspersky has a good static unpacker, backed up with a large signiture database :cool:
     
  13. FastGame

    FastGame Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Posts:
    677
    Location:
    Blasters worm farm
    Are you saying that the added 100,000 by these two AV's isn't going to make much difference in the next Av Comparatives test ?
     
  14. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    About Kaspersky...
    We all know how good is KAV's detection rate so 150.000+ of real signatures wouldn't surprise me at all. But generic signatures and heuristics cannot be count and they can detect as much as 50.000+ virtually different samples if you want...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.