New Malware Jumps to 73,000 Samples Every Day, Says PandaLabs

You're right about the market share. As far as being certain, that's exactly my point. There is no certainty or true accuracy to be had. However, what I said about submissions not always being the same, was, in hindsight not the best thing to say to make my point. Simple reasoning would tell you that submissions can often very well be the same. I shouldn't have even said such a thing. What I will say though, is that, in my mind, these numbers aren't accurate because I probably think a little differently than most. I don't consider any malware "new". Why? Well, what do they end up being? The same trojans, bots, and so on that we've dealt with for years. They don't truly even change their method of delivery. The only thing that has ever changed is the target.

That's really why I don't pay any attention to these reports. I know the threats will, no matter what they're packaged as (you can wrap a turd in Christmas paper..it's still a turd) end up being the same old bothersome trojans, botnets, rootkits and so on (rootkits bother me more than anything else, insidious little runts, but they still need to be allowed to run before they can do anything). I also know the malware people are going to come at me the same old way, they want me to "click here!", run this or that, have me fill out a fake form, install a codec so I can watch this "OMG!" moment, yada yada.

Really it just boils down to me thinking these reports are nothing more than scary ads for the AV industry. And, once you know what the threats are and how they get to you, then that's exactly what they are, scary ads.

 

Marketing aims to Higher Sales-Volume.
By releasing a (New Malware/day) Number (73000), which is, by far, Smaller than the Actual one,
these Reports can Not push users towards buying more AV products (i.e. Higher Sales-Volume).
Therefore, there is NO Marketing Trick.

The Opposite would be True:
If these Reports had presented a (New Malware/day) Number, which would have been, by far, Larger than the Actual one.
In that case, these Reports would have misguided users, tried to frighten them, and in turn lead them towards
buying more AV products (i.e. Higher Sales-Volume).
In that case, one would have called these Reports 'Marketing Reports' that had managed to attract more AV software Buyers.

@dw426:
Thank you! for the Civilized Discussion!

 

You're welcome, first of all. I see no point in getting uncivilized over an AV report. I might have to disagree slightly though, that is, if you think like a regular user sitting at home, that does care about security...I know, that's like finding a long considered extinct species sitting on your front porch, right? But, those users are out there..someplace. Anyway, if you think like them, then 73,000 "new" malware per day can be a pretty scary number. So, in a way, it can be considered marketing. That's just how I feel about it, whether it's good, bad, makes no matter, because it's a simple opinion.

Now, on to your thought about releasing higher numbers than what is actually in existence. Fact is, if they did something like that, then that would cross over from marketing into irresponsibility, and just plain wrong. For one thing, as you said, it's misleading, for another, their credibility would have to be greatly questioned. No one can truly know the exact number of malware in existence, new or old. So not only would they be grossly misleading people, you'd have to test the vendor/security group for supernatural powers.

 

I'm not saying this because I use Prevx but with all these threats that why most AV's have some sort of Cloud usage but only the Full Cloud Vendors are a step ahead IMHO!

TH

 

Instant cloud analysis isn't without it's problems though which may manifest themselves in higher than average FP counts. As there's more than one Full Cloud Vendor I'm not pointing the finger at anyone's product in particular.

 

Me either I just have a feeling that there will be many more Full Cloud Vendors! I always believe in the Layered and cautious Approach!

TH