New Virus Bulletin VB100 Results - June 2007

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by ianlai, Jun 2, 2007.

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

    ianlai Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Posts:
    6
    http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/2007/06

    Windows XP - June 2007


    Passed :

    -AEC (Trustport)
    Result history: AEC (Trustport)
    Product name: AEC Trustport Workstation Antivirus 2.5.0.970


    -Alwil
    Result history: Alwil
    Product name: Alwil avast! v.4.7 Professional Edition


    -Authentium
    Result history: Authentium
    Product name: Authentium Command AntiVirus for Windows 4.94.5


    -Avira
    Result history: Avira
    Product name: Avira AntiVir


    -Bullguard
    Result history: Bullguard
    Product name: Bullguard v.7.0


    -CA Home
    Result history: CA Home
    Product name: CA AntiVirus 8.4.0.11


    -CA eTrust
    Result history: CA eTrust
    Product name: CA eTrust r.8.1.634.0


    -CAT QuickHeal
    Result history: CAT QuickHeal
    Product name: CAT Quick Heal 2007 v.9


    -eEye
    Result history: eEye
    Product name: eEye Blink Personal Edition 3.0.9


    -Eset
    Result history: Eset
    Product name: ESET Nod32 Antivirus System 2.70.32


    -Fortinet
    Result history: Fortinet
    Product name: Fortinet Forticlient 3.0.412


    -FRISK
    Result history: FRISK
    Product name: Frisk F-Prot Anti-Virus 6.0.70


    -GDATA
    Result history: GDATA
    Product name: Gdata AntiVirusKit 17.0.7089


    -K7 Computing
    Result history: K7 Computing
    Product name: K7 Total Security 2006


    -McAfee
    Result history: McAfee
    Product name: McAfee VirusScan Enterprise v.8.5i


    -Microsoft Forefront
    Result history: Microsoft Forefront
    Product name: Microsoft Forefront Client Security 1.5.1937


    -Microsoft OneCare
    Result history: Microsoft OneCare
    Product name: Microsoft Windows Live OneCare 1.5.1890.35


    -MicroWorld
    Result history: MicroWorld
    Product name: Microworld eScan Internet Security for Windows 9.0.714.1


    -Norman
    Result history: Norman
    Product name: Norman Virus Control 5.90


    -PC Tools AntiVirus
    Result history: PC Tools AntiVirus
    Product name: PC Tools Antivirus 3.1.1.6


    -PC Tools Spyware Doctor
    Result history: PC Tools Spyware Doctor
    Product name: PC Tools Spyware Doctor v.5.0.0.182


    -BitDefender (SOFTWIN)
    Result history: BitDefender (SOFTWIN)
    Product name: Softwin Bitdefender Antivirus Plus v.10


    -Sophos
    Result history: Sophos
    Product name: Sophos Anti-Virus 6.54 R2


    -Symantec
    Result history: Symantec
    Product name: Symantec AntiVirus 1.0.0.359


    -Trend Micro
    Result history: Trend Micro
    Product name: Trend Micro PC-cillin Internet Security 2007 15.30.1151


    -VirusBuster
    Result history: VirusBuster
    Product name: VirusBuster VirusBuster Professional 2006 v.5.2


    -Webroot
    Result history: Webroot
    Product name: Webroot SpySweeper 5.5




    Failed:

    -Agnitum
    Result history: Agnitum
    Product name: Agnitum Outpost Security Suite Pro 2007 5.1214.616

    -AhnLab
    Result history: AhnLab
    Product name: Ahnlab V3 Internet Security 2007 7.40.1

    -Doctor Web
    Result history: Doctor Web
    Product name: Doctor Web Dr.Web 4.33.3.04230

    -F-Secure
    Result history: F-Secure
    Product name: F-Secure Protection Service for Consumers 7.00

    -Grisoft
    Result history: Grisoft
    Product name: Grisoft AVG 7.5 Professional Edition

    -Ikarus
    Result history: Ikarus
    Product name: Ikarus Virus Utilities 1.0.52


    -iolo
    Result history: iolo
    Product name: iolo AntiVirus 1.1.9


    -Kaspersky
    Result history: Kaspersky
    Product name: Kaspersky Anti-Virus 6.0.2.621


    -NWI
    Result history: NWI
    Product name: NWI VirusChaser 5.0a


    -Proland Software
    Result history: Proland Software
    Product name: Proland Protector Plus 2007
     
  2. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    New York City
    Thanks. For some reason(s), people on this forum don't concentrate on the VB100 results. They concentrate on AV-Comparatives and AV-Test results.
     
  3. TJP

    TJP Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    120
    Perhaps some forum members like to "opinion shop" when it comes to their chosen AV & test results :D

    VB100 results appear to be a good enough marketing statement for a lot of AV companies (i.e "look how many VB100 tests we've passed - in a row") & 37 AV vendors allowed their products to be tested.

    Based on the above & this link: VB100 test info, I'd say the VB100 test is every bit legitimate as another other AV test.

    So thankyou to OP "ianlai" for taking the time to post the results :thumb:

    I'd like to find out why Kaspersky failed the test...that was a real surprise. I have limited access to the reports. Perhaps False Positives??
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2007
  4. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Ditto. Interested in hearing why Grisoft failed as well, if anyone has access to the report details.
     
  5. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    and kaspersky/f-secure, and drweb.

    very strange results, for companys with such good records in VB, the details of 'why' need to be found out somehow.

    also surprised that fortinet can pass it, with its 1000+ FP's in the latest test results, shocking they could pass anything.
     
  6. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    "Suspicious" detections aren't counted as FPs by VirusBulletin. The FPs must be signature-based.
    It's strange that AVK (KAV + Avast) and eScan pass while KAV alone fails. Also, VirusBuster and PC Tools pass, while Agnitum fails.
     
  7. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Kaspersky failed but eScan passed? This is the first time I've seen that happen...

    Still, its quite interesting to know what exactly happened, since so many great products have failed...:)
     
  8. EliteKiller

    EliteKiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Posts:
    1,138
    Location:
    TX
    If you recall KAV 6 & 7 had a single FP in the June 2007 AV-Comparative Proactive test. I wonder if the same file sealed their fate with VB 100% o_O
     
  9. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    If KAV had an FP, then eScan should have had it as well, unless the VirusP rule applies (i.e. there is a small detection rate difference between a parent company's product and its clone AVs, the reasons of which are unknown. VirusP's tests were the first and I think only one to show this, but I did notice it personally also).
     
  10. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    Here is the condensed version of their award criteria:

    The requirements for VB100 (virus) certification are:

    1. 100% detection of malware listed as 'In the Wild' by the WildList Organization.

    2. No false positives when scanning VB's collection of known-clean files.

    All tests will be performed both on demand and on access. Any failure to detect a sample from the WildList set, in either mode, or a false positive alert in either mode, will result in a product failing to qualify for the VB100 award.

    :blink:
     
  11. azumi21

    azumi21 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Posts:
    129
  12. TJP

    TJP Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    120
    Obviously the test parameters for passing/failing is very stringent...which is a good thing.

    It would be nice if VB would allow non-subscribers to read an excerpt of their report for each vendor or an abridged version of the entire report.

    Even a comment listing the reason(s) for failing a test would be good & very appreciated.
     
  13. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    good test results one feels........one might see people questioning the integrity of this test since dr.web and kaspersky failed it......like they did with av-test's malware test....:mad: :mad:
     
  14. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I am useing eEYe Blink Internet Security beta 3.10 good to see Blink pass:thumb:
     
  15. the Tester

    the Tester Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2002
    Posts:
    2,854
    Location:
    The Gateway to the Blue Hills,WI.
    What surprises me is that Microsoft OneCare passed!
     
  16. EliteKiller

    EliteKiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Posts:
    1,138
    Location:
    TX
    I concur. In fact there are a lot of surprises in this particular VB100% test. ;)
     
  17. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    It's because of the Norman engine, which also passed :)
     
  18. Joliet Jake

    Joliet Jake Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    Posts:
    911
    Location:
    Scotland
    Three words...

    Bug Me Not! (google it)
     
  19. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    lol, If I were Kas, I would just about now have marketing officialy release version 7, to try and save some credibility.:rolleyes:
     
  20. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    avg missed on access one itw sample, because it was detected by the spyware side of the product. note that VB tests with default settings.
    kav missed one itw sample, which detection was at time of testing temporarly removed for some fixing.
     
  21. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Nope. Bugmenot doesn't have any logins for the site. Only a paid member can create a bugmenot login for others to use.
     
  22. TJP

    TJP Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    120
    :)

    I have my own username & p/word for the VB100 website...which gives me very basic access. I am not spending USD$175 for 12 months access to reports.

    Thanks for the info regardless. Hopefully someone with full access to VB100 will provide a few answers...
     
  23. The_Duality

    The_Duality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Posts:
    276
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    Theres your answer everyone! :) Thanks IBK! :D

    I think it may be a little bit of an unfair coincidence that KL had removed detection for that one peice of malware - just when the May 2007 VB100 was being compiled. Im happy. ;)
     
  24. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,634
    Location:
    UK
    If VB100 knew about this, it's unfair to penalise just because of some internal modifications being made to that particular detection. Obviously, if they didn't know, that's different.
     
  25. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    It seems that the thing about VB100% certification lately is: passes and fails aren't always indicative of a product's real-world ability to detect malware anymore.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.