Latest AV-comparatives.org test results ( was latest test resultsfor Nod32)

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Edwin024, Nov 30, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Edwin024

    Edwin024 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    1,000
    www.av-comparatives.org have just released their latest retrospective/proactive test and NOD32 comes out as the Number One. Congratulations to Eset!
     
  2. eisefr

    eisefr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Posts:
    153
    Location:
    Germany
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    49%... best result.. but is that really good? :doubt:
     
  3. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    100% of In The Wild is damn good in my opinion, nearest competitor was a mere 25%

    Cheers :D
     
  4. Edwin024

    Edwin024 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    1,000
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    I totally agree!

    And I think it is not so often that KAV is beaten in honest tests ;)

    By the way: the NOD32 version that was tested was older than the one we have now. So I guess that tested with the lastest version the rates would have been evebn higher, because Eset has added quite a few nasties in the latest signature-versions.
     
  5. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Yes it will be interesting to see the next set of tests, this should use the latest version 2.12.3 and would also use the latest improvenment with Heuristics for Trojans, added last week.

    Cheers :D
     
  6. eisefr

    eisefr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Posts:
    153
    Location:
    Germany
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    ITW stands for 'In the wild'.

    I am not sure if I understand excatly what that means.. Are that 'unknown' viruses ?
     
  7. Pilli

    Pilli Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    6,217
    Location:
    Hampshire UK
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    And look how much ESET has improved now for zoo Trojan detection, I'm impressed :)
     
  8. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    ITW indeed stands for In the Wild, it is determinded according to standards found here: http://www.wildlist.org/wild_desc.htm


    So am I :D

    Cheers :D
     
  9. dvk01

    dvk01 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    3,131
    Location:
    Loughton, Essex. UK
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    The problem, with retrospective tests is in the interpretation

    On the face of it NOD did much better than the others BUT when you read the small print you see that the test was done with "new" viruses that were not around when the original tests were done and they use the viral databases fromm the date several months previously

    NOD has very good heuristics so I assume that it was the heuristics that detected the new viruses and I'm very pleased that NOD can do this whereas KAV & other rely on signatures and NO antivirus can possibly detect by signature of a virus that didn't even exist when the original database was issued

    I am not knocking Nod's acheivement in this but the test results need careful looking at and a fairer comparison is the standard tests on that site not the retrospective ones

    If the tests were done with "todays" databases and it was a retest to see what was improved in the AV's since the original test then I would be over the moon with NOD's results as it is I take them with a pinch of salt as they have little or no relevance to the real world and the protection of your computer

    I think this needs moving to other antiviruses rather than the NOD forum as it will no doubt result in a discussion of all antiviruses rather than a NOD support issue so I will move it accordingly
     
  10. Edwin024

    Edwin024 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    1,000
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Ate a lemon or two before writing this "oh so not biased piece"?

    And I wrote this for the NOD32 Forum because it is the latest result of NOD32 that i was pointing too. Strange that any mod can do this...
     
  11. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Edwin024,

    I agree, an exceptional test result by NOD32 and a couple others.

    But remember this is the retrospective test that, by design, uses signatures/program updates that date from the start of the retrospective period, which should be August (can only access the online results - getting a decrypt error for the pdf files).

    So, using an August update, malware samples collected between August and October (for ITW) and November (for zoo) were scanned. The test is basically saying that NOD32 correctly flagged 49% of the samples presented to it in this test - all of which were unknown to NOD32 at the time the update used was created.

    This is a basic test of ability to handle day zero situations - new malware. Improvements seen in a newer test of this type would reflect improvements in the heuristic analysis.

    The complete view of an AV really comes by looking at both the retrospective and demand style tests published by av-comparatives.org/. They quantify different aspects of AV performance. For all of us, both traits are important. NOD32 is a very solid performer on both counts

    Blue
     
  12. dvk01

    dvk01 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    3,131
    Location:
    Loughton, Essex. UK
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    From previous experience any comparastive test is not suitable for a support forum because 9 times out of 10 it denegerates into a slanging match saying oh but XXX missed this one and so on

    I use NOD and am very happy with it and am pleased taht if those malwares were around in the previous months then NOD would have detected and protected me but on this forum we have a reputation for straight talking and pointing out the facts in an unbiased and fair manner

    It is unfair to anybody just looking at the results and by having a quick glance saying Oh NOD is perfect and found 100% but the others didn't

    When you have pointed out that it is a retropective test and pointed out what that implies then the viewer is able to compare more fairly and your commments in post #4 suggest that you had mis-interpreted the results as anybody having a casual look at them could do that is why I felt I had to point out the way that a retrospective/proactive test works and am sorry if you feel offended by pointing out the truth
     
  13. dvk01

    dvk01 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    3,131
    Location:
    Loughton, Essex. UK
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    To make it very clear the test used an antivirus database dated 8th JUNE 2004 to detect malware that was FIRST discovered between 6th August and 6th November 2004

    Once that part is pointed out yes NOD did very well but it doesn't mean that the others failed the test just that they didn't recognize malware that didn't exist at the time

    NOD's advanced Heuristics are to be congratulated on this as IF the malware had been around then NOD users would have been protected
     
  14. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Dvk01, I know exactly what you are saying, but at the end of the day if Nod32 wins by the use of Heuristics or a fly swatter, it is just getting the job done, and in doing so, it's that little bit better. The others I think will eventually have to follow suit, or find a way like Process Guard does with preventing dll injections of Trojans...

    Cheers :D
     
  15. dvk01

    dvk01 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    3,131
    Location:
    Loughton, Essex. UK
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    I am extremely happy with NOD and use it on one of my computers, I have KAV on the other and they are networked so both can scan each other and cross check

    NOD is absolutely brilliant on the Heuristic front whereas KAV is better on getting out detections for new malware very quickly

    I rarely see NOD making any errors in Heuristic detection, but it can and does happen, so to rely solely on heuristics to keep ahead of the rest is dangerous

    Unfortunately many of the new malwares cannot be detected heuristically as they are so similar to genuine legitimate applications that if any AV set the heuristic detection to grab them all we would be unable to use our computers at all.

    What all the AV's need is an unknown process block like PG has so nothing new is allowed to run without the user allowing it

    That would stop all new baddies, however that has it's own problems and we all know the user who just blindly allows everything or turns off that part to stop the "annoying" warnings and complains that his firewall/antivirus let the virus through
     
  16. Edwin024

    Edwin024 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    1,000
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Use NOD32 with a good AT program and it is probably the very best around. I have NOD32 with Giant anti-spyware, Ewido and Ad-Aware. Still no slow down of the system.

    Which was different by the way when i used this quartet with TDS-3 instead of Ewido.
     
  17. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Uff, no not 8 June! 6/8/2004 is english date format! all 8.August of course ;-)
     
  18. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    LOL finely a website that uses the true format ;) :D Ohhhh I'm liking it even more :D

    :D :D :D
     
  19. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    No, ItW is just the opposite of unknown viruses, they are all collected to one report made each month and they are spreading (mostly in corporate environment!).

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
  20. dvk01

    dvk01 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    3,131
    Location:
    Loughton, Essex. UK
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    My apologies but on the online results page it gives an antivirus database date as varying between 02.05.2004 to 02.06.04 and in the pdf it states 6th August

    So I accept the 6th August
     
  21. Blackspear

    Blackspear Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Posts:
    15,115
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Did you read the right test?

    * = new ITW-samples appeared during the 6. August and the 6. October

    http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2004_11.php

    Cheers :D
     
  22. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Av-Comparatives used the same scanning engines in BitDefender, DrWeb, McAfee, and NOD also in their 05-2004 test, so how can some product make improvents in heuristics tests or were the samples just now more or less different in their character?

    PS. BitDefender and NOD raised up the scores when DrWeb and McAfee dropped down after the 05-2004 test. KAV had a new engine. Summary, the both tests of Av-Comparatives, 05 and 11-2004 are both right in their own way concerning these products mentioned above, just the rankings varies as everything in real life.

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2004
  23. dvk01

    dvk01 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    3,131
    Location:
    Loughton, Essex. UK
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    yep http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2004_11.php

    Version of engine / signature 6.26.0.10 0432-2 N/A 4.30.0 3.15.1 7.100 (951) N/A 4.3.20 / 4383 1.835 60804ah N/A 8.11 2.20
    Date of signature 08/06/2004 08/04/2004 08/06/2004 08/06/2004 08/06/2004 08/04/2004 08/06/2004 08/04/2004 08/06/2004 08/04/2004 08/06/2004 08/05/2004 08/06/2004


    It just gets confusing for us poor Europeans when we are confronted by the American way of expressing dates

    Everywhere else in the world puts the day before the month except the Americans and it is extremely confusing
    That is why I always write the date in words now when dealing with international forums
     
  24. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Yeah, initially it was confusing also for me ;-). I had to change it to this style because most AV companies said that the month/day/year is the standard format. Now the problem are the users that bombards me with mails telling me about why all AV have different signature dates :p, but after some time they understand it like all the others.
     
  25. yeuxbleus

    yeuxbleus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Posts:
    90
    Re: Latest test results for Nod32

    Can I ask a stupid question? If NOD32 did well with just using heuristics, why didn't it do as well in the previous test, August 2004, where I assume heuristical and signature based techniques were employed? Were heuristics turned off during those tests? Please, don't get me wrong, I think NOD32 is a fantastic AV! ;)

    OT: BTW, I agree that the most logical way of stating the date is day-month-year.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.