NSS Labs files antitrust suit against multiple cybersecurity vendors

Oh come on. This is really sounding silly now.

Which is the same impact for all the products under test. And a valid test too since an infected system may not have Internet access.

Wow! This has now become laughable. So in your opinion, those testing companies are totally corrupt and on the take, intentionally skewing results to get the results they want, not what consumers might encounter in the real world.

Not even Symantec accused NSS Lab of falsifying results.

Where's my tin foil hat?

If, if, if. Bull feathers! And so what?

EVERY testing lab and report I have seen has stated they ensured the program was fully updated first. And again who's to say a user's infected computer currently has internet access? Have you never troubleshot a suspected infected system that couldn't connect to the Internet?

Have you never run malware scans from a thumb drive?

Have you never quickly disconnected a computer from all network access just to prevent further infection or to prevent that machine from propagating malware?

We get trouble calls like that often. It is important to know what programs allow off-line scans.

Anti-malware programs need to be very flexible.

But to your bogus "what if" scenario, what if the infected computer does have internet access? In that case the scanner that uses the cloud could be more current! That then skews the results in their favor.

So turn about fair play!

 

No, I don't think they are corrupt and I'm not accusing anybody about anything, that's why I use "could" and "can". But I think you know what I mean. I support use of standards, while you don't. That's OK, we just don't agree.

 

But "could" and "can" works both ways yet you chose to use them only to imply negative, diabolical, deceitful and biased behavior. The suggestion was NSSLabs would not treat products equally and would modify the tests to intentionally skew the results in order to purposely fail or down-rate this product, or to make that product excel, perhaps for monetary or marketing gains. BTW, such bribery and "payola" scams are highly illegal and a form of racketeering.

However, I agree with you that any lab could do that, and if they did, that would be despicable (and illegal).

A consortium (group of conspirators?) of manufactures establishing their own standards, and dictating their own rules restricting how a product can be tested is just as diabolical, deceitful and biased, and rife with potential for fraud.

I ask again, has the pharmaceutical or banking industry regulating themselves ever provided what is best for the consumer?

Of course, a test should be allowed to expose weaknesses in a product! Why do reviews if not?

Of course I support standards. Without standards, rules and law and order, there can be no freedoms or civilization. I have stated the standards I support a dozen times in this thread already - but I support standards that protect and are in the best interest of the consumer (which includes me and YOU!). And I support standards that treat products under test equally.

These standards include:

No product maker should have to pay to get a "good" review of their products.
No review score should ever be influenced (one way or another) based on any financial or business relationship between the maker and the tester/reviewer.
Every product under review should be tested using the same testing criteria, protocols and methodologies.
Testing facilities should be allowed to develop and use their own testing methodologies as long as they are applied equally to each product under review.
Every product should be rated using the same scoring methods and scales. ​

If testing labs and security program makers want to get together and agree on those standards, then fine. But the program makers should not be allow to design and stipulate which tests can or cannot be used. That is not in the best interest of the consumer.

 

I think this article "flew under the radar." Does make sense though since NSS Labs is U.S. based.

Cybersecurity testing standards under antitrust scrutiny at Justice Department

https://mlexmarketinsight.com/insig...nder-antitrust-scrutiny-at-justice-department

 

That is very good news for consumers. Time and time again, regardless the industry, we have seen when companies and industries are left to govern, set standards and regulate themselves, they will choose what is best and most profitable for them and not for We The People.

Thanks for that link itman.

 

Thanks to itman for providing factual light into this issue ( as contrasted with those whose rants provided heat but NO light.).