MRG Flash Tests 2011

Wow first MBAM miss
I really though MBAM would keep it's nice and steady record
Mcafee got all? Wow, seems like Intel acquisition worked . . . Joking

Nice for EAM!!

 

I hope he wasn't watching Rebecca Black videos. (Btw, if people read this and run off to find her....don't. Please.). The hate she's getting right now makes the initial Justin Beiber hate look like worship. It wouldn't shock me if people were weaponizing her videos (as if they needed to, the song itself played more than once would get the most hardcore of people to tell everything they knew).

 

wow, Mcafee detected all 4

Intel would be happy

 

more tests like these ... can You hear the crowd screaming

 

Weird flash test results!

Something wrong with the calculation.http://malwareresearchgroup.com/malware-tests/flash-test-results/

 

That page often has strange results.
Look here instead:
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1835982&postcount=139

 

Thanks for the speadsheet link!

 

Nice google docs link

 

From their forum (Sveta)
Posted 3/22:

 

One thing I have noticed since MRG have made the detection specifics about the flash tests public is EAM's native scanner engine has hardly detected anything, it is mostly the Ikraus engine or sometimes it is the behaviour blocker.

 

emam strongly belive in mamutu, thats the secerate of success. i.e. EMAM.

 

First Malwarebytes miss. Yikes, looks like I need to replace our VP of Research . Rest assured, we're looking to get our hands on that sample!

 

Well, they might strongly believe in Mamutu but in this series of tests, of the 15 accounted detections two have been Mamutu.
That's if I'm correctly assuming that's their "behavior blocker" - and if not, then Mamutu hasn't toted up at all yet.
Clearly, Emsisoft's implementation of Ikarus defines success so far.

 

thats because their own engine isnt a full AV and they remove duplicate signatures, so if Ikarus already has a signature for something, they dont include it in their own engine cuz it wuld be pointless

 

Totals page fixed, at least for now:
http://malwareresearchgroup.com/malware-tests/flash-test-results/

 

SAS is really taking a beating.

 

I dont hold true anymore to this theatrical array of tests. I say again, the ones showing crap are doing very well against zero day malware and some of the puffers stink. Prevx is doing well period though even in my tests.

 

So is Avast, AVG, BitDefender, F-Secure, Immunet, Microsoft, Panda and PCTools. Getting bruised is Avira, Eset, G Data and McAfee.

 

[2¢] While you may feel justified in calling this a theatrical array of tests, the basic, inescapable fact remains glaringly clear... that all vendors were subjected to the same set of malware, and a definite measure of performance does begin to unfold. If you (collective "you" here) want to downplay results, or embrace the results, it's entirely up to each of us to come to our own conclusions. I tend to place greater weight on what I see to be trends developing. A pass here or a fail there is not significant. But when a product fails 20 times out of 32, for example, I question the good sense and possible underlying agenda of anyone who would defend such a showing. [/2¢]

 

Look, I am not going to disagree but I could pick, and pick, and pick, one malware sample for each test until I found the right one to give me the results I wanted. It happens all the time on You Tube.

I agree I look for a pattern but there is a big difference between 4 samples and 23,000 at AV-C.

 

now Page, we both know that with Sandboxie, it really doesnt matter what AV you use.

Oh, and Vipre, sucks, plain and simple.

 

A lot of stupid things happen on youtube, please don't site it as a testing source.

 

100% agreement on Sandboxie, trjam.
As for the Vipre comment, nice try.

 

He'll be sporting it's logo by next week.

 

oh, tried it yesterday and it slammed my system speed. Funny MSE use to until version 2 and the new engine eally surprised me on a 30 malware test I did today. But heavens no, am I going to post on a website this 30 malware test, hmm, least off one.