New AV-Test.org malware testing (Avira finished 1st, CA eTrust finished last)

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by InfinityAz, May 23, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    Hasn't Norton always had a high detection rate but just used to be tough on computer resources? I hadn't kept up with it since when I last used it in '04.

    And with eTrust's low detection rate they still offer that $1500 malware compensation? o_O (for those not familiar with this, see Firecat's post)
     
  2. Durad

    Durad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2005
    Posts:
    594
    Location:
    Canada
    It used to be several years ago. It is improving as I could see.

    WHen I test samples online at Virustotal Avast, Norton and AVG rerely detect someting. It could be just for the area where I live.

    Files are usually detected by AntiVir, KAV based, NOD32, Panda heuristic, CounterSpy VIPRE and VBA32 heuristic. Very often WebWasher as well.
     
  3. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    5,868
    Location:
    New York City
    If you believe these results, then F-Prot has taken a major step backward.
    .... Highly unlikely.
     
  4. VikingStorm

    VikingStorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Posts:
    387
    And they were also slow on updates, one of the last to finally get rid of only weekly updates for consumers (not sure how they kept that policy for so long). They are still the slowest to respond to new malware, which I don't understand why they would be, since they technically have more resources than everyone else.
     
  5. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    Yeah I was aware of the slow updates. I had forgotten about when they used to never update the consumer versions on weekends except for high level threats.

    Maybe they are depending on SONAR since at least in one instance it had blocked a trojan (Storm Worm) from spreading on Norton computers. I don't know if this is good or not, it really depends on how good SONAR is.
     
  6. mrhero

    mrhero Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2005
    Posts:
    297
    Location:
    Ankara , Turkey
  7. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    Another crappy test !
    Why ? Do you believe Symantec gets more than Kaspersky and NOD32 ?
    Do you believe Rasing AV is better than NOD , Bit Defender ,Panda , the other competition ?

    I don't ! Real world results show completely different numbers !

    I did the same
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 23, 2007
  8. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I'll just copy and paste the same answer as in NOD32 subforum...

    Don't underestimate Symantec just because their NAV2004/2005/2006 line was crappy...
     
  9. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,306
    Hi HTB,
    I am curious as to how you determine "real world results" and the numbers associated with those results.

    Thanks,
    Jerry
     
  10. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    Well , I have been working as an IT for 2 years and I do see the difference between products.These tests definitely does not match my experience although it is not big.
     
  11. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,306

    I do not in any way doubt your experience, but since you mentioned numbers, what are those in your experience?

    Regards,
    Jerry
     
  12. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,221
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    "Real world results" is a word used by many vendors when their products score somewhat less than expected in reliable tests. No need to elaborate, but this has been put forward in the past.

    @HiTech_Boy: So, if your personal experience is so good then maybe you should start your own AV-test. :)

    I also have ~1000 samples, and I also see some things, but what I see in my sample set does not influence my opinion of any products in general....

    Regarding Rising AV, I would like to ask whether anyone has sent Rising a few samples in the past. They don't respond to virus submissions via email, but unlike a few vendors they rapidly add definitions to their database. We're talking ~5000 samples in a week here (ask Pykko, he has submitted thousands in the past). The problem is that they do not have good sources in Europe and the Western World to acquire samples, and this is why detection rates are not up to par. They definitely have the technical capacity to be good in detection rates, but not the resources unfortunately.

    However, Rising has been improving fast in recent days, and these results from AV-test suggest that AV-test's sample sources are quite varied when it comes to geography. Not that I'm sure about it, but putting two and two together from what someone at Rising told me and the results of Rising at AV-test and AV-comparatives, this seems obvious....
     
  13. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    Rising is not that good. you could ask some of the members of this forum that reside in China and they would tell you that. I do not and wil never trust AV-Test.
     
  14. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,221
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    The industry trusts it and you don't? o_O
    Wow, so suddenly Andreas Marx has become some German VX kiddie in the eyes of people....
    But yeah, Rising surely displays some strange results, as does Ikarus and I have no idea why...
     
  15. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    Doesn't Ikarus have paranoid heuristics, like Fortinet? I think those 2's actual detection rates are lower than that and their detection rates are just being bumped up by their paranoid heuristics.
     
  16. Inspector Clouseau

    Inspector Clouseau AV Expert

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,329
    Location:
    Maidenhead, UK
    :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
     
  17. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    Sorry , I wanted to say results :D

    2 years is not so much... :D Nice joke :D

    Unlikely you and Pykko , I don't collect malware . Don't have time for such thing.

    What I was talking about is that wherever I install NOD32 , it always finds much more than people's previous AV . Lots of Panda and Symantec users were scared when they saw their computer were so infiltrated . I mean , during these two year , I have never seen a case where Symantec and other "popular" vendors detect more than the small vendors .

    I am more than happy with my current choice . What is important to me is the real world experience. Two weeks ago , while surfing the net , NOD saved me from a IRC worm (it detected is as a probably a variant of...) . I submitted it to VirusTotal and not many AVs detected it (including popular products with better results here) . So this is what I care , such numbers are not important when there is nothing to back up

    Have a nice evening all :)
     
  18. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Inspector,
    Did AV-Test.org test F-Prot 6?
     
  19. Inspector Clouseau

    Inspector Clouseau AV Expert

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,329
    Location:
    Maidenhead, UK
  20. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    First of all this is a nice test and the results confirm my findings for several vendors:Symantec, Kaspersky, Rising, Avira, NOD32. I don't know about the others.
    Norton is a very strong AV even if it has some things that users hate: resource hog and perhaps the old thought they're adding samples very slow. They've changed. They have at this time the best submission and adding samples system... mostly automated. ;)

    The same thing happened to me when I installed Kaspersky or Avira after NOD32. They find a lot of malwares missed by NOD32. ;) But that's not a point. Every AV will miss something other eventually will catch.

    Now, I don't want to be misunderstood, but generally speaking when NOD32 is ranked very low you bash the tester. When nod32 is up everything is fine.

    Yes, the real world... it shows me similar results with av-test.org ones. Every AV has its up and downs. Maybe nod32 will get up again soon.
     
  21. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i personally dont use the 'results' but more of the ranking order of av's in the test.

    many people can count percentages, but i honestly dont think the differences between the different companys are not as big as these tests (inc av-comparatives) show or lead people to believe.

    i think it fits that you have norton/avira/kasperskys near the top.

    then with bitdefender/nod32/trend/mcafee and panda

    and then f-prot/drweb

    sure, there are many above fprot and drweb and even more so, on the ones below them, but i dont believe the differences are not as big as these tests lead people to believe.

    dare i use the words real world, i dont know... but i tend to go just off the ranking, rather than counting percentages.

    its nice that drweb still have 4.44 to be tested as soon as its released, sometime soon and still v5 in a few months (beta) too.
     
  22. Technic

    Technic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Posts:
    430
    Well said pykko.

    Couple of things I would like to mention about Norton. Their latest products like N360 and NIS2007 are really light indeed. Detection rate is reasonable too.

    So I have one suggestion: Please try these suckers before judging them (oh, and this is not for pykko).

    Actually I am concerned why KIS/KAV products 5.x/6x/7.x are slowing my computer down more than Norton's products. Its very hard to find to answer to this, but Blue said something about heavy disk IO etc. I can confirm that. HDD is hyperactive, web browsing is slow and opening file folders are slow. Thats why Kaspersky wont get a pole position, unless they fix these issues. I really like the security feeling (more than feeling) provided by Kaspersky, but the rest...:gack:

    My system is AMD Athlon 3200+ 1GIG ram.
     
  23. EliteKiller

    EliteKiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Posts:
    1,138
    Location:
    TX
    Kaspersky has had that feature for quite some time. AVK uses a KAV engine.....:D
     
  24. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    The last results of avast! Pro and AVG Pro are excellent!!!

    Even better when we can have a free AV with so good detection... :)
     
  25. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,751
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    There's no panic for this user.:p No plans to board a lifeboat and lower myself over the side of the ship. As far as explaining the showing of NOD32, I can't, as these things are generally too complicated and not my field or even my hobby. This kinda reminds me of a slow speed rollercoaster ride where NOD will be headed back up eventually. I also didn't detect any consternation or panic in the Inspectors posts either concerning his new baby (F-Prot). So I'll relax outside and have a beer.:D

    @trjam. Like the new avatar.:cool:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.