Nice Combo evaluating tool available!

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Firefighter, Apr 27, 2007.

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

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    It's name is Combinatorial Performance of Antivirus Systems. Here it is, don't shoot the messenger if it is crap!

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2007
  2. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Looks interesting. I will not shoot u BTW.:D
    Antivir seems to be with maximum score as single AV.
     

    Attached Files:

    • a.jpg
      a.jpg
      File size:
      32.1 KB
      Views:
      930
  3. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Well, by fishing on the Internet ;)

    Anyway, these scores are actually useful for gateway level scanning. Others should not pay too much attention to this. :)

    @Moderators: I had seen this thread when The Hammer had made his post. And I opened a new window and saw this thread again. By this time, The Hammer had deleted his post. But I went back to the "old" window which contained The Hammer's post before deletion and replied to it. And now, when I re-access this thread, I can see that all the contents of The Hammer's post have appeared in a quote in my post. I believe this could be a potential exploit, maybe it deserves more investigation?
     
  4. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    At least this showed the Ads in the page as a clean. DrWeb link scan, Netcraft Toolbar and McAfee SiteAdvisor gave the same results too.
     

    Attached Files:

    • ad.jpg
      ad.jpg
      File size:
      44.2 KB
      Views:
      926
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2007
  5. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
  6. NAMOR

    NAMOR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Posts:
    1,526
    Location:
    Arkham Asylum
  7. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
  8. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    Lol this thnig is bs.
     
  9. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Try Webwasher, Fortinet, eSafe and Panda combined :D
     
  10. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    Webwasher fortinet panda and ikarus is 93%
     
  11. ggf31416

    ggf31416 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Posts:
    314
    Location:
    Uruguay
    Webwasher, Fortinet, Panda and Prevx1 is 94% :eek:
     
  12. FRug

    FRug Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Posts:
    309
    Yup, combined power of the False Positive giants.
     
  13. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Actually I meant an exploit/bug in the Wilders Security forum code. I see that no one has even commented on it yet....
     
  14. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    Webwasher, Fortinet, Ikarus and Prevx1 also yields 94%. yeah frug combined power of the fp giants.
     
  15. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    Webwasher, Panda, eSafe and Prevx1 94%
     
  16. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    Webwasher, Panda, BitDefender and Prevx1 or substitue bitdfender with ikarus and you get 95% with both and i am not gonig to check any lnoger.it is a waste of time
     
  17. ggf31416

    ggf31416 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Posts:
    314
    Location:
    Uruguay
    Kaspersky, Antivir, Bitdefender and Prevx1 81%
     
  18. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Norman + BitDefender + AVG + Ewido (i.e. TrustPort) get 68%.
    So, your next gateway should have TrustPort combined with Antivir and GData AVK (Kaspersky + Avast) :D
     
  19. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    At least, in theory, this Combo evaluation works, when the TOP 4 SINGLE performers can give only 91 %/89 % protection. I mean, that this proggie is made as a sample basis. ;)

    TOP 7 single performers

    81 % -- Webwasher
    67 % -- Antivir
    58 % -- Fortinet
    51 % -- Panda, Ikarus
    47 % --- BitDefender
    46 % --- Kaspersky

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2007
  20. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    With already tested minimun False Positive successors (according to Av-Test.org and Av-Comparatives.org), you can get only 57 %...73 %.

    Symantec
    Norman
    AVG
    McAfee
    Panda

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!

    Btw, from every BS, we can get the crap estimate too! :D
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2007
  21. Wai_Wai

    Wai_Wai Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Posts:
    556
    Ignoring the false-positive giants and runtime packed executable detectors (eg Fortinet, Panda, eSafe, Sophos, CAT-QuickHeal, Webwasher etc.), here's the best % we can achieve:

    AntiVir --> 67%

    AntiVir, Kaspersky --> 74%

    AntiVir, Kaspersky and BitDefender --> 77%

    AntiVir, Kaspersky and BitDefender + AVG/NOD32 --> 78%

    AntiVir, Kaspersky and BitDefender + Prevx1 -------> 81%
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2007
  22. argus tuft

    argus tuft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Posts:
    280
    Location:
    Australia
    If I'm missing something here, please explain it to me, but isn't this all a bit useless? I would assume that in order to protect against "outbreaking malware", would the 2+ AV's need to be running in real time? Wouldn't that in turn lead to worse protection than 1 AV would give? (i do realize that prevx can be run alongside an AV, but what about the others?)

    Are there any two AV's that can run real time at once?

    Can anyone explain what I'm not getting here?
     
  23. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,695
    Hello,
    Combinatorial sounds like an evil prelude to a boring class of statistics or such...
    Mrk
     
  24. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Don,t take it serious, just a play, have fun.
     
  25. Longboard

    Longboard Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Posts:
    3,187
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    This is a genuine site: there is no judgement implied, there are no commercial imperatives/coercion, the analysis has reputable a database.
    There is no discounting for false positives (which is not necessarily a bad thing imo)

    There is an explanation here from the site operators.

    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=169860

    PrevX and Symantec have not done well over the last few months. :(

    The results have been dissected here:
    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=169602
    Blue Zanetti took some time at this.

    :thumb:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.