VB July 100% Award to DrWeb!

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Firefighter, Jul 30, 2003.

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

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    Hi everyone, have you seen any other results from the latest VB 100% Award on July 2003?

    DrWeb have got full 100% results! :D

    http://www.dials.ru/english/inf/news.php?id=549


    "The truth is out there, but it hurts!"

    Best Regards,
    Firefighter!
     
  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    But was not tested on WIN 98/2000/XP.

    Test was on NETWARE operating system?

    I thought the results were too near to the June tests!

    Nice to see you back, Firefighter, you have been very quiet of late ;).
     
  3. Bouton

    Bouton Guest

    Dr.Web did not get full 100% results. It missed 3 virus.

    "The truth is out there, but it is easily twisted!"
     
  4. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Hi Bouton

    I have just seen your last thread;

    http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=11882

    and I can see we are talking cross purposes. Can we agree that Dr Web did receive the 100% 'pass rate' but did in fact miss some viruses here!!

    I think the overall confusion comes about when people post 100% detection rates that an AV program has 'received' without the full picture.

    You obviously had a much better idea of the TRUE picture of this Netware result having access to the Virus Bulletin results.

    However, people can be confused when AV programs receive the coveted 100% ITW detection prize when they have 'missed' some viruses.

    As a scientist it would seem more logical if ONLY those AV programs which score 100% detection are given the PASS. It should not be given to those that miss any viruses. In addition, it should still be given to those that detect all viruses but give out some false positives

    I would much rather have my primary AV flag up some false positives rather than miss out on virus detection.

    For example, KAV has probably not done as well of late in the Virus Bulletin charts because of false positives, yet another AV can miss out on detecting virus(s) and still score a PASS!!!!

    This gives a very bad and incorrect message to newbies who are referred to the Virus Bulletin as an important site to visit to choose an AV program!!!
     
  5. Bouton

    Bouton Guest

    Virus Bulletin is IMHO the important site to visit to choose an AV program, but you must subscribe for full benefit. It is clearer on-line in 2003 than 2002, but it can still mislead, and its incompleteness allows anti-virus labs to twist the truth a little to make their appearance look better than their performance, but only subscribers will see the snake oil.

    Superlatives like "Once again Dr.Web version 4.29.c has shown the best results in detecting viruses" (Dr.Web web pages) and "Test results show Kaspersky Anti-Virus for Novell Netware turning in a stellar performance in distinguishing itself as the most reliable, efficient and easy to use anti-virus solution" (Kaspersky news letter) tell the reader "Virus Bulletin has said I am the best", but the truth is, neither of those programs had the best detection.

    The anti-virus programs which score 100% detection of IN THE WILD virus are given the VB 100, and this is fair and logical, but the winners can miss hundreds of other category virus in the same test, and this is not explained fully.

    e.g. Virus Buster VBShield is given the VB 100 in August 2003, so it can boast "I won the VB 100", but the truth is it missed 1,226 other category virus, in other category tests. Is this misleading? I think "Yes" is the only correct answer.

    The base line is, only NOD32 scored a true 100% virus detection in VB 100 August 2003. All others scored only 100% IN THE WILD virus detection.

    I am a very satisfied user of NOD32, of long standing, but I am not coming here to unduly praise NOD32. I merely point out, "The truth is out there, but it can be easily twisted!" :D
     
  6. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Checked out Bouton's thread on Virus Buster;

    They proudly display their Virus Bulletin awards.

    http://www.virusbuster.hu/en/

    Snakeoil rules!!!
     
  7. Bouton

    Bouton Guest

    I had not seen this web page when I commented about VBShield, but I am not surprised by its contents. It does not lie, but it does not quite tell the truth.

    "The truth is out there, but it can be easily twisted!" :D
     
  8. Fair Minded

    Fair Minded Guest

    Bouton,

    this is what Virus Buster claims in the VB100% hyperlinks:

    "Virus Bulletin award is given to softwares providing 100% detection of viruses in the wild. In June, virus scanners running on Windows XP were tested - among them VirusBuster for Windows Workstations. VirusBuster's software reached a 100% detection rate on ITW viruses, therefore it has gained the Virus Bulletin 100% Award"

    "In the wild" is repeated for the benefit of <people> like you who say this is snakeoil. You say this:

    "Virus Buster VBShield is given the VB 100 in August 2003, so it can boast "I won the VB 100", but the truth is it missed 1,226 other category virus, in other category tests. Is this misleading? I think "Yes" is the only correct answer"

    VB awards are given on the basis of ITW detection (the most important category according to VB), so for any product that is awarded this certification is allowed to claim this. How is this misleading? Did they or did they not get the award? And who is doing the misleading? The products that claim this? Why should they be obliged to point out their performance in categories that VB themselves exclude from award consideration? And why should this be considered snakeoil?

    You're tarring everyone with the same brush....everyone who says they got the award has to be lying by your double standards because they don't reveal the "whole truth." At various times, you call this "easily twisted," "snakeoil," and not lying, but "not quite tell[ing] the truth." So everyone is lying, and only NOD32 is telling the truth.

    And NOD32 is telling the truth, according to you, because it is backed by the only test (VB) that matters. Just because this is the only test where NOD32 happens to consistently outperform most is......oh my god!........just a coincidence....must be, right?

    Your philosophical sophistication is touching: engage in reductionism in every aspect of your argument. Everyone's lying in various degrees, only NOD32 isn't. All tests are invalid, except VB. And with that amateur syllogism in place, the champion can only be NOD32.

    <Please refrain from personal attacks. Pieter>
     
  9. MickeyTheMan

    MickeyTheMan Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    1,016
    You guys continuing at this will only add fuel to those that ask posting by guests be discontinued so that people stop hiding behind anonimity to troll, make wild accusations, etc !
    Think about it before it's too late and all have to pay the price for your conduct.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.