Trouble Trusting Test Results!

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by ttomm1946, Jul 2, 2017.

  1. ttomm1946

    ttomm1946 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2014
    Posts:
    217
    Av comparatives and Av test .org never seem to agree that much..Is it worth believing either?
    For instance..Norton aces protection on AVTest and fails on comparatives
     
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2017
  2. plat1098

    plat1098 Guest

    These comparative tests are powerful marketing tools. Those on top of the charts attract new subscribers and those who will be renewing their subscriptions. I would not take singular outcomes from these labs as gospel. If I did, Windows Defender would be submerged as of yesterday. Machine/software configurations and user behaviors vary enormously.

    You can read the pdfs on the test methods, maybe that's why there's discrepancy. One thing of value to me is the subset of zero day/financial malware testing. Older malware--well, just about everybody should detect malware 30 days old or get humiliated. If you really want to depend on a comparative outcome, look at MRG Effitas results on Norton for a third opinion. .

    https://www.mrg-effitas.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/MRG-Effitas-360-Assessment-2017-Q1_wm.pdf

    If nothing else, these comparatives have entertainment value. Forum conversation fodder. :)
     
  3. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,324
    Location:
    Slovenia
    If you're using safe computing habits and then estimate what's likelihood to get into situation where AM would save you from infection, you'll see that those results are not that important. Difference in protection levels which reputable AMs are offering for regular user is IMO minimal. So you don't have to worry too much about results.
     
  4. ttomm1946

    ttomm1946 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2014
    Posts:
    217
    Kind of figured the test are slanted
    I get more from user feedback here and other places
     
  5. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,221
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Word of advice: You're better off using products that are doing "average" on most of the popular testing sites. Because those products are neither benefiting from the methodology, nor are they influencing/sponsoring tests.

    Certain products also have in the past worked to game the comparatives results. I of course am not having the disclosure rights for the same. :)
     
  6. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    6,347
    Location:
    USA
    Doing well on a test does not mean one cheated. Neither does sponsoring one. Someone has to pay for these tests. It would not take long for someone that was giving false results to be found out and shamed out of the business. Everyone thinks someone cheated when their favorite product does not do well. The best thing to do it find a product you like, make sure it runs well on your machine, and have a good backup solution. Nothing detects everything. Be prepared. Nothing catches everything and recovery will need to be your next plan when your first one fails.
     
  7. aztony

    aztony Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Posts:
    595
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    Interesting...
     
  8. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,641
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    :thumb:

    Someone please give this man a beer.
     
  9. avman1995

    avman1995 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    Posts:
    944
    Location:
    india
  10. plat1098

    plat1098 Guest

    Oh wow, since you're handing out beer, can you pass one this way?

    (psst, I'm female)
     
  11. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,641
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    Oops sorry!
    NP, your paypal address will be fine :D
     
  12. illumination

    illumination Guest

    Someone mention Beer? :)

    Seriously, just read their copyright/disclaimer on their testing sites, where in very little letters they explain they can not ever claim to test completely/properly, and these tests should be used for pretty much nothing but a glimpse. As for methodology or samples, read these as well. If they tested with very fresh "within 24 hours to complete FUD samples", you would not see 98% to 100% test scores going on, which i find misleading myself.
     
  13. Smiggy

    Smiggy Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Posts:
    237
    Location:
    The Angel Isle
    I view them in much the way I view the vehicle 'MOT' certificate here in the UK.
    Face value and mandatory requirement.
    Once you lift the bonnet, or hood, everything is different case by case and as said by posters time and time again, your own browsing habits will in 99% of cases dictate your threat/risk level.
    Run a sandbox or snapshotted VM for browsing, AV/MBAM sort of thing for the rare occasions when/if you forget or plug a USB drive in!
     
  14. clubhouse1

    clubhouse1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2013
    Posts:
    1,124
    Location:
    UK
    I never bother looking at them, this 1/4's number one will be next 1/4's number three or whatever..The real test is the end users experience, did their AV let them down...There is no 100% efficient AV probably never will be, how many times does your AV kick in with a warning each week?....I haven't had an unexpected warning for over 6 years.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.