NOD32 + KAVP4.5 Testing

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by IsisOsiris, Nov 20, 2004.

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

    IsisOsiris Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    4
    well. just did a fullscan with KavP. it fished out a whole bag of bugs. then I let NOD come thumping with the special ah forces OPs. Guess what, it finds 55 whopping viruses KavP completely missed.

    so much for KavP being the sherman tank.

    at this rate, I'm going to need 4 scanners of each. AT,FW,AV,SD,PT, and on and on..

    offtopic note:

    NAV200x sucks lemons. its as good as saran wrap. my previous OS was killed by trojans and viruses. I coudn't even access the net, period. corrupted all the drivers (wireless and lan).
     
  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    I would find this result very surprising :eek:
    Not surprised with your conservative surfing habits ;)
     
  3. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    I have to agree with Blackcat here - I've not run across a situation in which either of these products have left much of anything of note for the other. How camparable are the settings? Have you taken a small sampling of the files flagged and processed them through a multi-engine on-line scanner, Jotti's for instance, for some consensus voting on the matter?

    Blue
     
  4. the mul

    the mul Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Posts:
    1,703
    Location:
    scotland
    Well all I can say on this matter is that kav4.5 has not let me down yet.
    I also have nod installed as a back up to kav and both have worked together very well and no infection so far on my xp pro system.
    I would point out one factor though, most of my surf time is spent on widers and I do not take any risk on p2p or download anything that could be a risk to my system.


    Your friend

    THE MUL
     
  5. Benvan45

    Benvan45 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Posts:
    556
    Are you still able to use your PC with all these security measureso_O?
    Fort Knox indeed!!!!

    :D :D :D

    Putin
     
  6. nameless

    nameless Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2003
    Posts:
    1,184
    What I'd love to know is why you have a "whole bag of bugs" on your system to begin with. I've been online since 1997, and never had one malware activation. I'm not bragging any more than I'd be bragging if I said I haven't had a car accident in that same timeframe; I'm just saying... What is it you do, for crying out loud?

    Edit: Never mind. I already know: You use Insecure Explorer, you're lax on patching, you perhaps install cracks and use keygens, you run whatever arrives in your inbox, and you either don't use a personal firewall, or don't have it enabled or configured correctly.
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2004
  7. Eliot

    Eliot Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Posts:
    854
    Location:
    Arkansas, USA
    I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE!!!!!!!!!!!! :D Well actually I don't have WG 3 installed, but I do own it. I also don't have Port Explorer at all. I run the rest of that just as the MUL does. :rolleyes:
     
  8. nameless

    nameless Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2003
    Posts:
    1,184
    Everyone needs a hobby!
     
  9. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    Hi Mul and Eliot,

    I use to run NAV 2003 and NOD32 as a backup. I would keep all of NOD32's realtime processes turned off until I wanted to run a scan. I now have KAV 4.5.104 running real-time and was thinking about NOD32 as a backup. Can you guys tell me how you configure NOD32 so that it doesn't interfere or hang up KAV 4.5? It does seem like KAV catches everything (I run McAfee online from time to time to confirm) but I am thinking a good heuristics tool may come in handy. Thanks for any ideas that you may have on this subject.

    Rich
     
  10. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    I am also surprised at IsisOsiris' claim. I think one or two extra pickups from NOD mostly with heuristics to be very beleivable, but 55? Very surprised. Any logs to show what was caught by NOD that KAV missed?
     
  11. nameless

    nameless Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2003
    Posts:
    1,184
    I can tell you right now:

    Probable Win32.False.Positive :D
     
  12. My Pet Goat

    My Pet Goat Guest

    What a load of bull the original claim is: please put a full list and description of the 55 KAV missed that Nod32 found, would you?

    I would not at all be surprised if KAV found 55 that NOD32 missed, but the other way round, please . ...... The NOD32 fanboy crowd is getting from bad to worse at Wilder's: spreading lies about yourself is one thing, now you're BSing about the competitor whom everyone else knows is the one you're still desperately trying to catch up with.
     
  13. Paul Wilders

    Paul Wilders Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2001
    Posts:
    12,472
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I do agree backing up statements with for example log files is the best way to go indeed.

    This remark is uncalled for. Only after examining log files one can come to the conclusion the statement made has been questionable, false or true. "lies" do not fit into this picture; at most a wrong conclusion.

    Finally: I fail to see any BSing in this thread; at most a statement without a log file back up. Thus, let us all keep this thread mature and friendly please.

    regards,

    paul
     
  14. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    I have managed to collect 126 infected files that KAV 4.5 with extended database was unable to detect. From those 126 undetected files about 35 were polyengines.

    Btw, I have managed to collect some 550 infected files that NOD32 with AH was unable to detect too, about the same amount that many other av:s except McAfee were unable to detect too.

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2004
  15. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    Man,I think you should calm down. I mean we are talking about Antivirus tools buddy...its not the end of the world. Don't loose any sleep over it. :)


    tECHNODROME
     
  16. nameless

    nameless Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2003
    Posts:
    1,184
    The bottom line is:

    Do you put any credence in a brand-new Wilders member (or maybe not so new?) who posts a very seemingly troll-like hit-and-run, and who admits to being wildly clueless about security in general?
     
  17. IsisOsiris

    IsisOsiris Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    4
    just because I registered as a member recently does not mean my claims are not credible.

    the problem is the computer is the laptop. i'm the second owner. the POS NAV05 was useless. its only recently I migrated to the usual one-two punch KAVP4.5, NOD32, and Sygate firewall. soemtimes, i'll even use outpost together.

    I was quite surprised KAV missed so many bugs.

    Second round today. once again, on a new winxppro install, the net connection was unavailable but dhcp resolved itself- just no access. KAV missed 9 viruses that NOD32 caugh but caught a whopping 400+. therer is still some malignant bug on this comp regurgitating. the moment my firewall shutdown, it was the port gates of bugs pouring in was one of the problem.

    for dumbass calling me a liar. you want the logfiles huh? lemme get them when I have time.

    from my experience from over a year, NOD seems to always catch what KAV misses on my PC.

    just checked the logfiles. NOD's is too long. its all files for all the NOD scans. i can show the summary of all the scans. it has the date stamp.

    i'll need a capture screen util for this
     
  18. IsisOsiris

    IsisOsiris Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    4
    drats. Kav's append option wasn't turn on. oh well, i'll capture it.
     
  19. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    First off, nobody called you a liar, we were all shocked that KAV would miss 55 virii that NOD caught, this seemed way out of proportion for the majority of people that responded to this thread, most of us are quite knowledgeable about security software and hearing that KAV missed 55 that NOD caught was surprising. Secondly My wanting to see logfiles had everything to do with what virii NOD caught( and KAV missed) and nothing to do with calling you a liar, I don't recall suggesting such a thing in my post. I also resent being called a dumbass and suggest that you read the TOS for posting on this forum. Try to be alittle less sensitive in the future, the great majority of us here are here because we want to help other users and not resort to namecalling.
     
  20. Paul Wilders

    Paul Wilders Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2001
    Posts:
    12,472
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Save the relevant part as a .txt file and attach them to your reply; that should do the trick ;)

    regards,

    paul
     
  21. solarpowered candle

    solarpowered candle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    1,181
    Location:
    new zealand
    Have you tried updating Kav
     
  22. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    IsisOsiris,

    Have you confirmed that these are virus samples and not false positives via one of the multi-engined on-line scanners?

    There are some subtle configuration issues with KAV 4.5 - the main one being "Scan Compound Files" must remain checked even if none of the options below it are active. (see here)

    Are both AV's scanning all files, or at least a similar number of total files? Discrepancies here could point to configuration differences yielding your results. I don't doubt your observations, but I am unclear on the equivalence of the two scans.

    Blue
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.