New Detection Test - Dennis Labs

Perfect.

 

cool test, alot of the big static-detectors failed miserably,

im not really shocked to be honest

 

In retrospect, it seems that Dan was predicting the future with uncanny accuracy, given that both AV-Comparatives and AV-Test followed in the footsteps of Dennis Technology Lab -- and, essentially confirming the results observed. An “important gap in comparing vendor claims” has now been filled, and hopefully such tests will continue to mature in 2010.

 

Ya, and they're probably fat kids too so it's even worse.

 

Exactly how did this comment add to the conversation ?

 

Carefull or you'll be accused of not contributing to the conversation.

 

Thanks, your post gave me the giggles, perhaps you should try the cartoon type of image, if your are good at drawing!

 

If what you're saying is correct then I think Symantec might have the ultimate tool to fight malware: a team of dedicated mediums who can anticipate any malware before it hits the internet. Some people might call it dangerous thinking, but it really would add to heuristic and win the battle against malware once and for all.

 

Dan The Magnificent?

 

FYI -- As a point of comparison, please see Testing the PrevX 3.5 Engine, executed by Immunity on behalf of Prevx using only five test cases.

 

In the absence of content, must comedy suffice?

 

Norton showed no alert for a few of the malware which puts into question did they really detect all 40.

From the report:

If they did not display any alert/warning how do they know that the AV protected the system?

Dennis Labs: "Oh look, nothing happened at all not even a warning... must be the AV blocked it I guess. PASSED!"

 

According to the report, “The Observation stage concluded with another system snapshot. This ‘exposed’ snapshot was compared to the original ‘clean’ snapshot and a report generated.”

Also note the definition of “defended” in the document: “Malware was prevented from running on, or making changes to, the target.”