MRG Effitas Project 37 – MRG Effitas Time to Detect Assessment Q4 2013

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by fax, Feb 26, 2014.

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

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    localhost
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 26, 2014
  2. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,741
    Location:
    New York City
    The average time to detect is up. It is taking considerably longer for AVs and other products to detect malware they initially missed.
    @fax,
    Thanks!
     
  3. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,085
    Emsisoft and Kaspersky got perfect score in detection. That's great. Althought we don't know what is their average time to detect for samples they miss.

    hqsec
     
  4. Cutting_Edgetech

    Cutting_Edgetech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Posts:
    4,953
    Location:
    USA
    I'm surprised SUPERAntiSpyware is still around. It been testing horribly in every category for years now.
     
  5. vojta

    vojta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Posts:
    830
    Frankly, I detect a bit of sadism on MRG side in this case.
     
  6. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    It still shows up in peoples sigs.
     
  7. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    Yes it's almost comical... I'm surprised about MBAM, it is a reasonable result but I was expecting a higher percentage.
     
  8. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    Its been a long time since they last released results for a test. :thumb:
     
  9. Rompin Raider

    Rompin Raider Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Posts:
    1,228
    Location:
    North Texas
    Noob...you're guys are shinning! Not surprising!
     
  10. Solarlynx

    Solarlynx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Posts:
    1,916
    Emsisoft and Kaspersky :thumb:

    All my pets, including Avast is OK.

    It's interesting where would be detection of Comodo here?
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2014
  11. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Thanks for the update fax :)
     
  12. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    localhost
    You're welcome! :thumb:
     
  13. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Yeah, and therere is good reason for it to.:cautious:
     
  14. Frank the Perv

    Frank the Perv Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Posts:
    882
    Location:
    Virginia, USA
    Kaspersky & Emsisoft, no surprise that they are the top products.

    SuckyAntiSpyware, no surpise that it is the worst product.

    SoftSphere (DefenseWall) & Surfright (Hitman Pro) did very well.

    MBAM while scoring well, did not finish as strong as usual.

    Webroot finished in the bottom half -- which will annoy all the fanboys.


    That is all.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2014
  15. vojta

    vojta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Posts:
    830
    MBAM, 15 samples missed: 97.4%

    Webroot, 8 samples missed: 98.6%
     
  16. Frank the Perv

    Frank the Perv Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Posts:
    882
    Location:
    Virginia, USA

    Yeah, they both did well.

    But still, MBAM usually finishes stronger.

    And Webroot finished in the bottom half.


    Ok then.
     
  17. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    Yeah, makes you feel "safer" but deep inside i know it doesnt necessarily mean that. :D
     
  18. vojta

    vojta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Posts:
    830
    Both did well, what? Webroot fanboys must be annoyed because it ended in the bottom half (I suppose that you include HIPS products but exclude antimalwares for some reason), MBAM fanboys must be appalled. Come on, you posted here to have a fanboys war, don't quit so soon.:'(
     
  19. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,083
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Try to find a test of MRG on which DefenseWall did not score a 100%, so technically DW did not do very well, it does what it always does, stopping 100%

    DW does this (100% score) for quite some time now, see for instance http://www.av-comparatives.org/single-product-review-softsphere-defensewall-hips-may-2009/ where DW was also tested against 100 samples, not being detected by major AV's at that time.

    On the other hand I don't understand why a HIPS/FW is included in a test to determine the detection delay of malware samples o_O
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2014
  20. Esse

    Esse Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Posts:
    383
    Amen to that...

    /E
     
  21. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    Agree!
    I've always found DW to be out of place in some of these tests.
     
  22. FleischmannTV

    FleischmannTV Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,071
    Location:
    Germany
    On the contrary I always appreciate these very rare occasions, where we see products like DefenseWall tested at all.

    It might seem displaced in this test but in comparison to pop-up HIPS it does not require the amount of user interaction to achieve protection. From the way it works it's actually good to compare its zero day protection value with reactive detection based security products. Whereas some products need some time to catch up with their detection mechanisms, DefenseWall does not depend on it.

    But of course thanks to these ridiculous 100% test results we've been seeing across the board for the major players lately, one might think that reaction equals prevention.
     
  23. Gein

    Gein Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2013
    Posts:
    76
    No F-Secure?
     
  24. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,083
    Location:
    Netherlands
    When DW V3 came out it scored 100% at Matousec, they did not want to include it because it had a HIPS :eek: of course all programs tested at Matousec are HIPS neither :D So yes it is good for DW to reach audience with thia test participation.
     
  25. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    If im not mistaken DW is like some sort of Anti-Executable HIPS that uses a whitelist so i'd say that unless the malware is trying to replicate or infect a legit file then it will pass most tests easily. :D
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.