Proactive vs manual detection

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by blazr63, Dec 3, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. blazr63

    blazr63 Lurker

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Posts:
    58
    Location:
    Danvers, MA
    I was curious why anti-virus programs in general have a much higher detection rate on manual scans vs real time protection. Why would scanning a hard drive for data threats be more effective than checking the data as it downloads? The same definitions are used for both processes.
     
  2. ThunderZ

    ThunderZ Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Posts:
    2,459
    Location:
    North central Ohio, U.S.A.
    I am sure there are other reasons but one would be that most viruses are packed in either a rar or zip file with the program that the Downloader thinks they are getting, or with an installer which is many times harmless in itself. While a good AV that scans incoming internet traffic will catch most of these, not every AV catches all of them. It is much easier to detect the threat once opened or upon attempted install\execution when it is in the open so to speak.
     
  3. ggf31416

    ggf31416 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Posts:
    314
    Location:
    Uruguay
    If you are talking about the AV-Comparatives test:
    The Retrospective/ProActive tests are On-demand, against malware unknow to the tested antiviruses which were frozen 3 month ago. Don't confuse them with on-execution ("real-time").
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2006
  4. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,818
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    you can confuse on-demand with on-access, but do not confuse on-access with on-execution...
     
  5. ggf31416

    ggf31416 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Posts:
    314
    Location:
    Uruguay
    Thanks for the explanation about the terminology
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.