The results of testing some antiviruses on fightin active infection, conducted by AM

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Windfresh, Oct 25, 2008.

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

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    Hi to everyone,

    Here is the result of the test, conducted by Anti-Malware.ru Please, read it via Google Translator from Russian.

    The results are astounding, but all the AV vendors seem to have reconciled themselves with them- no protests, just polite explanaitions and RECOGNITIONS ! that ...yes, this time we have failed.
    Here is the methology of conducting this trying test:
    http://antimalware.ru/node/668
     
  2. Windfresh

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    Re: The results of testing some antiviruses on fightin active infection, conducted by

    In short:

    the following AV were tested in the most impotrant area antiviruse are meant for-curing ALREADY infested machines:

    1. Avast! Professional Edition 4.8.1229
    2. AVG Anti-Virus & Anti-Spyware 8.0.0.2
    3. Avira AntiVir PE Premium 8.1.0.367
    4. BitDefender Antivirus 2009 (12.0.10.1)
    5. Dr.Web Anti-Virus 4.44.5.8080
    6. Eset NOD32 Antivirus 3.0.669.0
    7. F-Secure Anti-Virus 2009
    8. Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2009 (8.0.0.357)
    9. McAfee VirusScan 2008 (12.1.110)
    10. Outpost Antivirus Pro 6.5.2358.316.0607
    11. Panda Antivirus 2009
    12. Sophos Antivirus 7.3.4
    13. Norton AntiVirus 2009
    14. Trend Micro Antivirus plus Antispyware 2008 (16.10.1182)
    15. VBA32 Antivirus 3.12.8.6

    The classification of the malware in accordance with Kaspersky Lab classification:

    1. Adware. Win32.NewDotNet
    2. Backdoor.Win32.Sinowal.ce
    3. Email-Worm.Win32.Scano.bd
    4. Rootkit.Win32.Agent.ea
    5. Rootkit.Win32.Podnuha.a
    6. Trojan-Dropper.Win32.Agent.vug
    7. Trojan-Dropper.Win32.Mutant.e
    8. Trojan-Proxy.Win32.Saturn.cu
    9. Trojan-Proxy. Win32.Xorpix.dh
    10. Trojan-Spy.Win32.Zbot.bsa
    11. Trojan.Win32.Agent.lkz
    12. Trojan.Win32.Monderb.gen
    13. Trojan.Win32.Pakes.cuh
    14. Trojan.Win32.Small.yc
    15. Virus.Win32.Rustock.a

    The tables of the results can be seen on the web page of the results

    http://antimalware.ru/malware_treatment_test_2008
    I may speak in circles, but after reading some comments of AV guys from AV companies, I understood that all antivirus companies had recognized the credibility of the test.
     
  3. Windfresh

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    Re: The results of testing some antiviruses on fightin active infection, conducted by

    It is indicative and revealing that the AVs with the strongest heuristics-VBA32, Eset, Sophos, Avira are the weakest in curing actively infested files.
    Avira is superb and almost unrivaled in resident defence and detection, but when it is about healing an ALREADY compromised OS, I am compelled to turn to an old man-Dr.Web with its Dr.Web CureIt or Kaspersky Removal Tool.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2008
  4. Jin K

    Jin K Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Posts:
    105
    as always kaspersky and Dr.Web showing a very good result ، impressive!!
     
  5. Windfresh

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    Re: The results of testing some antiviruses on fightin active infection, conducted by

    I wish Dr.Web were so perfect and strong in proactive protection and self-defence :doubt: , but at least at the very moment Dr.Web is OBJECTIVELY the best healer or curer of infested comps among other antiviruses.
     
  6. Windfresh

    Windfresh Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    86
    Re: The results of testing some antiviruses on fightin active infection, conducted by

    It seems unbelievable, but all the AV vendors politely comment and ...obediently agree with the results of testing. Incredible...It's nice to know that serious companies can lose with dignity.
    Avast is a real suptrise maker. Avast seems to have bought Gmer anti-rootkit technology and that is why such good results.
     
  7. Medank

    Medank Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Posts:
    102
    i really dont belive in this new malware ru avtest,
    i dont know why but i feel like the user that tested the AV's is not to belive in 100%, but hey that's just me.
     
  8. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    Re: The results of testing some antiviruses on fightin active infection, conducted by

    Proactive protection and self-defence should be improved in the upcoming v5. 4.44 already has a decent heuristic analyzer, generic signatures, packer detections and the origins tracing technology.
     
  9. waters

    waters Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Posts:
    934
    Antivir will not let me open link
     
  10. Ed_H

    Ed_H Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    662
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    No problem opening with Avira Premium. Which version are you using and what message do you get?
     
  11. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    WFM as well...
     
  12. waters

    waters Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Posts:
    934
    Webguard detected on the first link.Reported in Antivir as HEUR/HTML.Malware.
     
  13. proactivelover

    proactivelover Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Posts:
    840
    Location:
    Near Wilders Forums
    so sad about eset
    because eset antivirus does not have self-defence
     
  14. emperordarius

    emperordarius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Who cares
    But this test doesn't have to do with self-defence, but with removal.
     
  15. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    i think what proactivelover was trying to say is that since nod32 doesnt have self defence malware would easily be able to disable it and then nod32 wouldnt be able to remove the malware. i didnt relise nod32 removal rate was so bad.
     
  16. emperordarius

    emperordarius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Who cares
    Ah, I understand. That's another reason why it's always good to run a behaviour blocker/HIPS alongside with those kind of avs, so that you get alerted if anything tries to disable them.
     
  17. proactivelover

    proactivelover Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Posts:
    840
    Location:
    Near Wilders Forums
    lodore你解释感谢
     
  18. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,069
    Dr Web and Kaspersky, both Russian software, doing well in a Russian test - coincidence ?
     
  19. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    Don't forget that Avira, F-secure, Symantec, .. etc "western" products have received good reviews from anti-malware.ru in the past.
     
  20. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Apparently yes :ninja:

    But those two products always get great scores at Anti-Malware's tests.....
     
  21. alloucho

    alloucho Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Posts:
    145
    Not in other areas (out of curing ALREADY infested machines), for example here:
    http://www.anti-malware-test.com/?q=taxonomy/term/16
    where Dr.Web is almost on the bottom line.
     
  22. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    No surprise here.

    The curing abilities is what was tested ;)
     
  23. thathagat

    thathagat Guest

    Re: The results of testing some antiviruses on fightin active infection, conducted by

    from avast site.........Anti-rootkit built-in

    Another key feature of avast! antivirus 4.8 is the inclusion of anti-rootkit technology, based upon the class-leading GMER technology, and now built-in to the scan engine as standard.....
    avast! antivirus 4.8 has full live-system anti-rootkit protection. No boot disks required, it's all built-in and working with one install.
     
  24. proactivelover

    proactivelover Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Posts:
    840
    Location:
    Near Wilders Forums

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Oct 26, 2008
  25. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    Re: The results of testing some antiviruses on fightin active infection, conducted by

    Hello,
    lastpost in that thread was march. see if you can find a final stand alone version?
    could always download the file was first post and see how old the version is.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.