New AVP

I can't even update that UNA Demo anymore. Can you show those update settings with a snapshot, how to get those FIRST updates to make a test with that Demo too?

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

huh? seems like you know a lot more about this application than you originally claimed!

 

Ding-dong. I think there is more than one *ringer* involved in this thread. Sunny with 4 posts, & KJH with 1.

Still in all, I hope that UNA truly does graduate into the ranks of the *good* antivirus programs. However, I think their present price ($30/year) is rather steep for a relatively unknown AV.

 

Named VirDet before?

 

Is this the same UNA av the thread is about here If it is it needs a lot of work.

bigc

 

VirDet=Virus Detonator?

If it is then it is a shady name because it gives impression that virus is 'triggered' on your system...got it?

 

Not necessarily. Somewhat awkward names often come up going across languages and cultures. For example, consider our recent thread here on Safe'N'Sec, obviously for safe and secure. When I consider small phonetic excursions that are likely, and where they may go, I probably wouldn't go with that product name in the English language. But maybe that's just me...

Blue

 

Thanks for the clarification Blue

 

http://www.antisource.com/article.php/una-antivirus-ruse

 

Indeed, you can get F-Prot and Arcavir for the same price

 

Great link, BC. The evidence is over-whelming: these folks are flying under false colors.

I understand UNA's need for publicity, but these sort of tactics can earn a BAAAD reputation even for a good product.

IMHO, if UNA sends a representative who clearly reveals his connection to the company (as ArcaVir's Stormbyte has done, for instance), and who possesses technical know-how about his product (as Stormbyte does), I believe he would be given a friendly hearing.

 

I have to admit that MAYBE nowadays this UNA has more potential than some 9 months ago, when I tested that before. Today UNA has more than 100k definitions, but some 9 months ago it had only less than 60k.

A short scan with UNA Free online scan

http://www.unasoft.com.ua/eng/online.html

against my 28 TrojanClicker and 21 TrojanNotifier samples.

25/28 TrojanClicker -- UNA

20/21 TrojanNotifier -- UNA

We can compare these to my last test in post 120. here,

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=70679&page=5&pp=25

where such a good performers as McAfee VSE 8.0i, BitDefender and Command AV 4.92.8 scored all worse than UNA and of course Norman VC 5.8, but maybe that was expected with this Norman.

But because this UNA sample size was so small, it's only worth to test more samples.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Just scanned updated UNA 1.83 against my 3624 infected archived samples collection. Not counted those detectings yet, but at least the trojan like protection seems to be VERY GOOD, something about 87..90 %, but the "Total Pararanoid Protection" level in my test table will be under 80 %, about 79 %. Heuristics also very good, detected 143 files as suspicious.

I'll be back when those countings are finished in all categories.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

So, here it is, UNA v1.83 for Windows added to my last test table after I really found that updateable trial version from here.

http://submitter.ru/f.php?url=http://antivirus-una.com

It has really potential in certain areas, actually among those most common ones, trojan like malware and of course among riskware. Maybe this is quite good scanner to test single infected files with their online scanner in the link above.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Are all the AVs in your table updated with definitions to the same date for comparision or are you using different dates for different AVs?

 

UNA has about one WEEK advantage in updates, but it doesn't matter so much in a test like this, especially when it scored worse than the others but Norman.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

So all the other AVs except UNA are at the same date?

 

Norman is between UNA and the others.

Within 2..4 weeks I have seen only max 30 detectings more by certain av:s, not KAV engined ones of course, because they already detect close to 100%.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Hi Firefighter,

Then all the other AVs except Norman and UNA are at the same date?

I, for one, really appreciate the hard work you put into your tests
and providing the comparison tables.

Perhaps, when you get some time, maybe do an updated table with the AVs
all at the same date. I realize this takes a lot of work to sort it all down.

Thanks,

 

Hmm..I'd like to see Quickheal vs. UNA...

 

My daughter is home sick, so I thought that I would keep myself busy at Wilders. I dug around about the "practices" of so called "unknown" posters regarding UNA.

It seems thay have allegedly tried this trick before here.

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=40608&highlight=national antivirus

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=13061&highlight=national antivirus

I know very little about UNA, and cannot get their website to work. I agree with bellgamin, that if UNA had a representative come forward and ask for testers, ect. It would be a very credible thing.

(My unsolicited 2 cents)
It not very odd that all these post happen at the same time. Its called barnstorming. This is where you create a hugh buzz all at once to get people talking.

 

UNA detects much more than QuickHeal or ClamWin. And Norman more than UNA. At least if I would test them

 

Is that mainly because UNA has very poor Script like Malware protection, especially macros?

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Norman detects more Win32 malware and more macros. In detecting Scripts they are nearly the same.