Quick Heal Reply From Developer

Since we have so many experts in our forum. I've said enough. Here is the direct reply from the developer of Quick Heal. You can post your reply and thoughts on their answers on Quick Heal. The following is their reponse to some of your posts.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the Black Screen issue, I’d like clarify that this is one of the renowned feature of Quick Heal.
It is known as “Sensor”. “Sensor is designed to fight the threats posed by new/unknown Trojans, Worms and Backdoors (Currently 70% threats are posed by these elements). It appears as a Black Screen before you logon to windows. Sensor blocks any program, which is designed to load automatically. If you get an alarm from the sensor, read it carefully. If it points to a program file you have just installed, choose accept. If it points to a program file that has not been installed by you, or any of your desired applications, it may be a new/unknown Trojan/Worm file. Choose to “Delete” this file. The entry from the registry/system file shall be removed and the file shall be moved to the Quarantine directory of Quick Heal”.
The black screen of Sensor never takes the system in DOS mode. The Screen looks like the DOS mode. This feature helps users to detect & remove new trojans/backdoors/worms even without updating to Quick Heal. If the user properly uses this feature then this will provide 100% security against the new threats. This feature was released 2 years back and right now appreciated by our existing customers for its detection of new/unknown threats.
2nd issue in your forum was the Quick Heal’s non-detection of 100% viruses in the test results around the world. I’d like to comment on this issue that Quick Heal does detect & remove 100% wild viruses. What we are not detecting is the Standard and Polymorphic virus. Such viruses are those viruses that are not in the wild. We can refer to them as dead viruses. Such viruses are the DOS based & harmless in current scenario. Those viruses can only be found in the test labs. Adding them into Quick Heal would not serve any purpose to the customers. What serves to the customers is, we are providing the proper detection & removal for the current & existing threats. Although we are improving our detection for such dead viruses on regular basis. That is being done only to improve our test results in all the fields. Improvement can be seen in various VB test results. Even renowned AV testing organization are more emphasizing on the detection of wild viruses.
I hope you would comprehend our point of view & dealt with your customer or forum member accordingly.
I’d also request you to please provide us such valued feedbacks and your queries regarding our software. We’d help you to tackle such discussions.



NOVEMBER 2002

ITW OVERALL: 100%
ITW OVERALL: 100% (O/A)
ITW FILE: 100%
MACRO: 97.25%
STANDARD: 67.68%
POLYMORPHIC: 76.85%

February 2003

ITW OVERALL: 99.76%
ITW OVERALL: 99.76% (O/A)
ITW FILE: 99.75%
MACRO: 97.83%
STANDARD: 72.10%
POLYMORPHIC: 82.94%

June 2003

ITW OVERALL: 100%
ITW OVERALL: 100% (O/A)
ITW FILE: 100%
MACRO: 97.54%
STANDARD: 80.67%
POLYMORPHIC: 91.08%


Thanks,
Regards,

Anand Bodke
Technical Head

Cat Computer Services Pvt. Ltd

 

BS statment from them.

Bugbear.B - Polymorphic virus and ITW
Polymorphic and ITW -- PE_MAGISTR.A
etc.

They can say whatever they want but having a good Polymorphic Engine is a MUST!!!

"If the virus encrypts its code in a different manner each time it infects, it will be a polymorphic virus. This way, the virus signature changes each time. The problem that antivirus programs encounter is that they will have to search for different codes or strings each time. "


tECHNODROME

 

ROFL...

 

Again this is a reply from Developers regarding concerns raised by forum members:

First of all our statment that
"not detecting is the Standard and Polymorphic virus"
is not in the general sense. The statment was in context with test conducted at Virus Bulletin where we are having less than 100% detection. All other categories we are having 100% detections.

We know what is a polymorphic virus and how to detect them. We mean to say we are not detecting older (viruses which were developed in 80s) DOS based polymorphic viruses. In current Wild List (ITW) there are around 10 to 15 % polymorphic viruses and we are detecting all of them. We are adding every new virus even thought it is polymorphic. Whats the point if a anti-virus does detect all the old polymorphic viruses but does not detect the one which is currently infecting the systems. I mean to say latest polymorphic viruses. Quick Heal does detect them very well (eg. W32. Etap which you will find many well known AV will not detect in all their forms). You can read the fine print which is written alogn with the test in Virus Bulleting test which says that 'Quick Heal is very good at detecting newer viruses.'
Conclusion we do have a very powerful polymorphic virus detection engine.

Anand Bodke.

 

Here Tech.... something to measure it by....