Latest Antivirus Test Results Feb 2005

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by VoX, Mar 3, 2005.

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

    VoX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Posts:
    1
    Hi everyone, I'm new here obviously, but I've seen a lot great information here. I'm at a crossroads with two different antivirus systems at the moment. Kaspersky and NOD32. Tried both and each has their ups and downs. I have been leaning toward NOD32 because of the 'in the wild' capability I keep hearing about but this is what bothers me.

    http://www.av-comparatives.org/


    I'm wondering if anyone here can shed some light on this subject for me. Why did NOD32 score lower than GOD awful Mcafee? Are these results reliable? Are there other test result websites I can check out? Thanks for your time.

    Steve
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2005
  2. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Because god awful McAfee isn't that terrible as many may think (especially not McAfee Enterprise Edition 8.0i). And McAfee was on the scene when ESET didn't even exist. It's just the way it is. McAfee is using strong generic signatures (just like Kaspersky and BitDefender) for Rbots,SpyBots and similar where NOD32 can rely only on heuristics (it doesn't use any generic signatures for these).
    And when the test base is so big there can be many misses just because of that. And ofcourse raw signature strenght (how many signatures is used) also help alot for higher score.
    But if i'm honest score of ~95% is a very good result for NOD32.
     
  3. erikguy

    erikguy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    236
    Location:
    Salem, OR
    Hey there Vox, welcome to Wilders! In the test you are linking to the reason NOD scored lower than McAfee is probably because the tests used a lot of "zoo" viruses which means they are not "in the wild". Also if you look at their ProActive Tests which means generic detection by heuristics, NOD came out on top at 49%. In this test they purposely use out of date signatures on each program to see which antiviruses can catch the most malware without having the signatures yet in their database. NOD was the ONLY ONE to catch all "in the wild" viruses with these out of date signatures.

    Here is another test done by our own resident AV tester here at Wilders, FireFighter. BTW for future reference, you are only allowed to link to the main AV-Comparatives home page, not the specific test.
     

    Attached Files:

  4. Gauthreau

    Gauthreau Guest

    Here's an interesting article that outlines some of the troubles with the definition of an "in the wild" virus". There are a few problems with it, and the reliance on the detection of them. At the same time, it outlines a few problems with turning your back on "zoo" viruses. NO specific AV's are mentioned.

    Neil

    http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1813
     
  5. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    That article was a good read. Thanks for posting.

    Welcome to Wilders VoX

    Another article here --> SC Magazine (Multiple variants of viruses and worms call for new defense strategies)
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2005
  6. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    I have made a new test by categorizing some samples according to McAfee VSE 8.0i too.

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     

    Attached Files:

  7. hollywoodpc

    hollywoodpc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,325
    May seem like a stupid question but , why is ewido mixed in with each ? How does that give an accurate result of an AV program ?
     
  8. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    hollywoodpc, Read the post carefully, Firefighter's having results for both the product itself and the product with Ewido combined.
     
  9. erikguy

    erikguy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    236
    Location:
    Salem, OR
    Thank you for your hard work Firefighter!! Appreciated as always! :D
     
  10. flinchlock

    flinchlock Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Posts:
    554
    Location:
    Michigan
    Firefighter, thanks for all the testing you do to help all of us!

    I have a hard time determining if any of the products you are testing with are Free or Not Free.

    Any chance you could use a different font color for the PAY versions... maybe GREEN?

    THANKS,
    Mike
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.