Malware Block Rate: Internet Explorer – 99%, Opera – 0%

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by Daveski17, Dec 15, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,030
    Location:
    Lloegyr
  2. Bambo

    Bambo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Posts:
    194
    Well this is about "socially-engineered malware" so use IE and have fun ;) I thought numbers were extremely obviously rigged when they were in the 80s, now closing in on 100%, heh.
     
  3. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,030
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    LOL! Yeah, who do they think they're fooling? o_O
     
  4. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    I might well be rigged but it,s a fact that all downloads are screened by smart advisor in IE that has a very good detection due to the signature data base it uses. There is no such feature in FF or Opera I think.
     
  5. Bambo

    Bambo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Posts:
    194
    There is nothing wrong with IEs SmartScreen but numbers are screwed. They do have detailed info on how they test but using words like "real time" does not say much. I read it when they did their first test. Lots of holes to color result for sure. They did "screening" during process and such. Seems like evaluating IE hitrate looking at end result. Just playing with words, seems ok when you read it but no way to tell. They do not just race around clicking randomly bit.ly links, of course they have sources which rules outcome completely - as in most other tests. Test buzzwords like "Dynamic", "Real life", "Social" sources do not change that. At that time Microsoft was only sponsor of NSS Labs. Google, Opera, Mozilla would not participate.

    Rigged is probably wrong word, would MS sponser rigged tests? Testing under certain conditions with chosen procedures sounds better :)
     
  6. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,030
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Well, as for downloading, as opposed to 'drive-bys' both Firefox & SeaMonkey use whatever resident AV you have to scan any download.
     
  7. Bambo

    Bambo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Posts:
    194
    Yes and so you use MSE since you now have associated Microsoft with "security" :) Mission accomplished.
     
  8. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,030
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Yeah, I suppose so. I do kinda rate MSE quite highly. I don't think I'll ever be much of a fan of IE though.
     
  9. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,030
    Location:
    Lloegyr
  10. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,855
    I guess that website is several days slow:
    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=288880

    It's also sad that most of that response was complaints about what was tested. When the test makes it evidently clear what they were testing.

    Basically a test lab has come forth and said, "Hey, were testing the ability of products to do X" and Google has responded with "But you didn't test the ability to do Y!!!". Err, the point was to test X, not Y.

    But yeah, NSS could provide more info, also I'm not sure why we have 2 threads about this.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.