Prevx fails Infected System Rescue Test

Discussion in 'Prevx Releases' started by Page42, Dec 16, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    Prevx not looking too sharp in either test...
    http://malwareresearchgroup.com/?page_id=2
    :(
    Note: I know that some people consider MRG to be untrustworthy. That said, I'd like Prevx Joe's input on the test, if he wouldn't mind.
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2009
  2. Fajo

    Fajo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Posts:
    1,812

    In my own tests from about 2 weeks ago show a completely different picture. So I guess Ill just base my judgment off my own results.
     
  3. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    kind of goes against the grain of what they say in their other tests, here and here Lol
     
  4. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,011
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    The best thing you ever said! :D

    TH
     
  5. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,011
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    MRG = FUD

    Paul Wilders Exposed there Hypocrisy which they cannot deny! So I hope Joe makes his reply here fast and then closes this thread! https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=251113

    TH
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2009
  6. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    Both of your links are to the same test.
    And that test is for 60 Rogue Software samples.
    The test I linked is for 1000 samples of malware, the samples up to one month old , only Trojans, Backdoors, Worms, Rogues, Spyware and Viruses were used.
    I think the previous problem involved Comodo, and Comodo is not tested in this group.
     
  7. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    Calm down, TH. You may not like the test results, and you may not like the people doing the testing, but from what I see, they named the malware that Prevx missed. Joe can tell us whether that's correct or not. Let's allow a few facts to surface before screaming for the thread to be closed.
     
  8. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,011
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Page don't get me wrong!

    I don't get upset I just don't like cheats and Untrusted malware testing = MRG! Also I said after Joe replies I hope he closes this thread as he has closed other one's on the same subject!

    TH
     
  9. NAMOR

    NAMOR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Posts:
    1,526
    Location:
    Arkham Asylum
    I'm just guessing here but the on-demand portion states "9. The test is conducted by performing a right click scan of the folder containing the samples and allowing the application to delete / quarantine any samples detected."


    So I assume that the answer to the on-demand portion will be like this https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1570521&postcount=10 .
     
  10. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,011
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
  11. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    I agree, and I thought that too when I read it. Honestly, I wish Prevx was better about right-click and on-demand scanning, but it isn't, so I use the real-time protection. And that is what the second test involves... real-time protection, detection and removal capabilities of the programs tested.


    I get your point. I got it the first time. Perhaps if you would stop campaigning for the thread to be closed, and allow Prevx Joe to respond, the interests of all might be better served.
     
  12. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    20,917
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Removed Off Topic Posts. May I remind all Wilders members that if this thread does turn into an insult debacle, it will be closed. Stay on Topic!

    JR
     
  13. kasperking

    kasperking Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    nope....its all about detection and removal not realtime as hitman has no realtime protection and its here where prevx is the strongest-realtime protection,thats why the test is iffy...
     
  14. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    Read the methodology used in the Infected System Rescue Test, specifically Step #11... "Real Time protection and other default methods of detection/prevention used by the applications are turned on."
     
  15. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,011
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Understood and awaiting Joe's Reply! But again they are unreliable and dishonest. In any tests they do why would you believe anything said by them? o_O It's just like me telling you that ACDG are the best and BFHI are not!

    TH
     
  16. kasperking

    kasperking Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    page your concern is
    right........then please look at the right test

    quote:
    check point 5,8 and 11
     
  17. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    I am looking at the right test, and I have checked all the points. Enough so that I knew they were real-time when you said they weren't. I see exactly how they tested, and they tested all products the same way... essentially how they perform in real-time after a system is infected. They are quite clear about what they did.
     
  18. kasperking

    kasperking Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    now i might be a bit groggy today....but plzzz explain if you diasble real time protection of prevx.....then execute the malware...then re-enable realtime protection and scan to test whether it detects or not.....how can that test the real time protection o_O prevx has on execution scanning so when you disable prevx protection to execute the malware how can you say it failed in the first place ?
     
  19. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    Perhaps the best explanation is that the test is designed to see how Prevx acts when it is installed on an infected system. I wholeheartedly agree that Prevx's strength is catching malware on execution (at least I have assumed that is its strength!). Why is that asking so much of an application? MBAM has gained a lot of notoriety for being just such a tool. If Joe comes here and says Prevx isn't supposed to detect infections that are already in place, well, let's hear that. The test says Prevx isn't too hot in that category.

    PS- Over and out. I'm sleepy. :)
     
  20. PrevxHelp

    PrevxHelp Former Prevx Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Posts:
    8,242
    Location:
    USA/UK
    There are two types of tests - one over a random folder and started with a right click scan, and one on a real PC, with live infections.

    Prevx honestly does not care about on-demand tests over a bulk of files, and in virtually all cases its detection rates will be significantly lower than in a real test on an actual system. We look to protect users against real infections coming from a real system - for example, a program entering the system from a possible exploit within web browser is handled significantly differently from a program just double clicked on the PC. Prevx works heavily on context which is why these tests do not provide adequate means of assessing what a real user would see or be protected from.

    Additionally, Prevx guarantees its malware cleanup - therefore we must have stellar detection or we would have been out of business years ago :)

    However, within the next couple weeks I suspect that we will be receiving some test results which will vastly overshadow this test ;)
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2009
  21. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    Question for you, Joe... is Prevx effective when installed on a computer that is already infected, i.e. when it is not active on the system when the malware first installs? Thank you.
     
  22. PrevxHelp

    PrevxHelp Former Prevx Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Posts:
    8,242
    Location:
    USA/UK
    Yes - this is the state that we get most of our customers in and the point at which we guarantee cleanup :)
     
  23. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    Joe, I recall you stating that in your own comparison tests, that Prevx will gladly send along any samples missed by other company's products if so requested. (I believe that I have paraphrased you correctly.) So are you saying that you have requested the missed samples from MRG, and they will not comply?
     
  24. demoneye

    demoneye Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Posts:
    1,356
    Location:
    ISRHell
    the numbers talks for them self ...:)
     
  25. PrevxHelp

    PrevxHelp Former Prevx Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Posts:
    8,242
    Location:
    USA/UK
    Hello all,
    MRG has been performing tests of Prevx and these tests have been ethical, rigorous, and fair. They will be supplying the relevant samples and if they are still missed now, we will be adding detection as soon as possible. In the meantime, I'm going to close this thread to prevent any further speculative discussion.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.