MRG Effitas Antilogger & Browser Security Test

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by Scoobs72, Aug 19, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Scoobs72

    Scoobs72 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Posts:
    1,108
    Location:
    Sofa (left side)
    http://malwareresearchgroup.com/2011/08/19/mrg-effitas-altilogger-browser-security-test/
    I vote for Spyshelter. It's the only significant one missing from the list I believe?
     
  2. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
     
  3. Yanick

    Yanick Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Posts:
    269
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    GeSWall? :D
     
  4. Atomas31

    Atomas31 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2004
    Posts:
    923
    Location:
    Montreal, Quebec
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    I vote for Geswall and Comodo Internet Security...
     
  5. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    no more peg2 testo_O
     
  6. cm1971

    cm1971 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Posts:
    727
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    Another vote for GeSWall. I am glad they are starting to include these types of programs. :cool:
     
  7. Scoobs72

    Scoobs72 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Posts:
    1,108
    Location:
    Sofa (left side)
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    I don't think CIS or Peg2 would be classified as specific anti-loggers or browser security products. Maybe, but I wouldn't have thought so. Online Armor might qualify. I'd also like to see Authentium Safecentral tested.
     
  8. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    Test SpyShelter. Also would like to see Avast SafeZone tested.
     
  9. BoerenkoolMetWorst

    BoerenkoolMetWorst Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Posts:
    3,764
    Location:
    Outer space
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    +1 For Spyshelter and Avast's SafeZone.
     
  10. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    geswall
    Comodo defence plus
     
  11. Konata Izumi

    Konata Izumi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    Posts:
    1,544
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    GesWall :thumb:
     
  12. ellison64

    ellison64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Posts:
    2,499
  13. PJC

    PJC Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,959
    Location:
    Internet
    MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    I fully agree with you! :thumb:

    Where is SpyShelter ? o_O
     
  14. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,067
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    Is not a matter of MRG if you want to see SpyShelter on this test send an email to the dev info[at]spyshelter.com
    The last time due to some problems the SS dev requested to be removed from any MRG test.
     
  15. Scoobs72

    Scoobs72 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Posts:
    1,108
    Location:
    Sofa (left side)
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    Hopefully Sveta will let us know whether SS is one of the options for testing, or whether SS are still refusing to be tested, for whatever reason.
     
  16. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,067
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    SS is one of the options but SS has to request it, I know this by Sveta
     
  17. Sveta MRG

    Sveta MRG Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2009
    Posts:
    207
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test


    Yes, we are happy to include SS into this test, but we would like to discuss the methodology with their developing team first, this is to avoid any possible "misunderstandings" later on.


    Regards,
    Sveta
     
  18. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test

    Thanks for that link. If there are current alleged problems then that's all the more reason to have SafeZone tested by an independent source IMO.
     
  19. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    TODAY! :D
     
  20. shadek

    shadek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Posts:
    2,363
    Location:
    Sweden
    Spyshelter.
     
  21. GrammatonCleric

    GrammatonCleric Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Posts:
    372
    Re: MRG Effitas Altilogger & Browser Security Test


    Yeap they don't want to be tested since they failed the last banking keylogging test back in Oct of 2010 I think.

    Mainly because the HIPS prompts were too cryptic and there was no difference between them and a legitimate program install.

    Just read the MRG prior banking browser test where SS fails and the reason given why...I tottaly understand MRG reasons. I mean you get a popup asking to allow for global hooks but the same popup occurs when installing legitimate program so how is one to know which one is bad? As far as you know you might be installing legitimate software that has been poisoned and now you will be allowing all popups thinking it's good ware meanwhile inadvertently installing malware. A HIPS distinction must be made.

    P.S.
    OA++ also failed that test because of that.
     
  22. shadek

    shadek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Posts:
    2,363
    Location:
    Sweden
    All classic HIPS would fail a test with that methodology. However, since then, Online Armor (included in OA++) has improved a lot and been updated to version 5. It now states which actions are usually malicious and which are not.
     
  23. GrammatonCleric

    GrammatonCleric Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Posts:
    372

    Yeap, and their test was of 4, so I would love to see that test again with 5.
     
  24. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    I wish that atleast they can change their test results interpretation.

    - 2 marks for Pass with clear cut pop up alert about malware
    - 1 mark for Pass with ambiguous pop up alert( op up alert regarding interception of malicious behavior but same alert also comes for legit applications as well)
    - 0 mark for no pop up alert or un-related pop up alert

    This way people will know about classical HIPS whether they atleast intercepted the malicious behavior or not.

    @ sveta! what do you think about this?
    Thanks
     
  25. shadek

    shadek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Posts:
    2,363
    Location:
    Sweden
    How can a software pass if it only says the tested malware is trying to do SOMETHING, but not whether it's good or bad? I bet most of the vendors could accomplish noisy applications. The challenge is in security software distinguishing between good and bad. A pop-up with no information whether it's good or bad should therefore result in a failure. :)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.