On-Demand Comparative August 2011

Not quite true. In our case (Panda) we're doing pretty good in all tests (OnDemand, False Positives, Retrospective and Real-World).

 

NickHSunbelt recently posted that he thought they were trying to get in but that he wasn't positive as he doesn't deal with the section that deals with testing organizations.

 

I would expect the same for removal tests. We will see.

 

I would like to see a Whole Product test with MBAM running alongside the AV.
Some years a member, Firefighter, ran some test with and without an AT alongside the AV. Nearly all AVs improved with that combination.
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=83323
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=58597

I don't expect it to happen, but I can "want" can't I??

Jerry

 

page 5
"...malware in non-PE format, like present in the 'other malware/viruses category'."

 

Well we can see right now.... The July & August 2011 Real-World tests from AV-Test.org are available at http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/test-reports/julaug-2011/. Sorting by Repair there's 3 vendors with the top score of 5.0 (F-Secure, Panda, BitDefender). Norton is down below towards the bottom with a 3.0. They barely made certification.

 

pbust, why did you mention Norton?

A product that only scored 2.0 in repair and also scored less in protection made certification. I do not see how Norton "barely made certification."

 

You're right, it's not "barely". Anything less than 11 doesn't get certified and Norton was at 13.

I mentioned Norton as users here historically defended Norton's not-so-good scores in On-Demand/Retrospective tests with the argument that real-world tests are the only valid tests. And now that it seems it didn't do so good in the real-world test either but still being justified... never mind, might be a paranoia of mine.

 

Brace urself pbust - norton fans might now conspire against u

 

Yes I just realized... please excuse the comment above if it hurt anybody's feelings. Like I said maybe just a paranoia of mine.... move along, nothing to see here

 

Repair is considered a real-world test?

 

I don't understand how av-test does their scoring. There always seems to be discrepancies. For instance on "repair":

PCAV repair 98, 77, 59 = 234 and they get a 3.5
Norton repair 91, 86, 58 = 235 and they only get a 3
AVG repair 97, 92, 65 = 254 and they still only get a 3.5
G-Data repair 100, 84, 62 = 246 and they get a 4.5

 

Shouldnt it be ?

 

PIS repair 100, 91, 68 = 259 = 5.0

I don't know the exact formula either, but I don't think the different sub-items under the Repair category carry the same weight. For example removal of active rootkit components is probably more important than removal of non-active components.

 

Must be. Nice showing from PCAV! I still wish you guys could get the disk i/o down though.

 

By definition, I suppose. What AV-Test and others call "real-world" never include repair, though.

 

your last sentence is probably very near the mark!Anybody associated with any AV company has a vested interest to be paranoid about the opposition

 

Symantec is one of the few AVs that actually run pretty flawlessly on my PC.
I'm not excusing the number of FPs it has lately, but it actually works. It runs.
I can't say the same for many other AVs. Some won't even install. Pretty pathetic.

 

Sorry but didnt understand this part

 

in removal is the opposite, non-real-world conditions such as running a scan in safe mode, run a RescueCD, attach the hard disk as slave are better.

 

I think this is unfair for False Positive test (yellow area in pic)

Is that the packers detection also not count in on-demand scan test?

 

Bring um on, Pedro has plenty of back up here....

 

Paranoid of what. With the solid results Panda has been turning in, I seriously doubt Panda is paranoid about any vendor. Pedros remarks were right on the money, but as a gentleman, he added the last sentence.

 

Wish we had some more vendors

 

As an example, take a look at a test report from the link pbust posted. "Real-world" is never mentioned under REPAIR but one of the PROTECTION sections has Real-World Testing in brackets.