VB100 on Windows 7

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by webster, Dec 2, 2009.

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

    webster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Posts:
    285
    Location:
    Denmark
    http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/2009/12 Login required

    Passed:

    AEC (Trustport)
    Alwil
    ArcaBit
    Authentium
    AVG (Grisoft)
    Avira
    Avira Personal
    BitDefender (SOFTWIN)
    Bullguard
    eScan
    Eset
    F-Secure
    F-Secure Protection Services
    Fortinet
    FRISK
    GDATA
    K7 Computing
    Kaspersky
    Kaspersky AntiVirus 2010
    Kingsoft Advanced
    Kingsoft Standard
    Kingsoft Swinstar
    McAfee
    McAfee Total Security
    Microsoft Security Essentials
    Nifty
    PC Tools Internet Security
    PC Tools Spyware Doctor
    Preventon
    Qihoo
    Quick Heal
    Sophos
    Sunbelt Vipre
    Symantec
    VirusBuster
    Webroot

    Missed:

    AhnLab
    CA Business
    CA Consumer
    eEye
    Filseclab
    Microsoft Forefront
    Norman
     
  2. vijayind

    vijayind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Posts:
    1,413
    Yay!! Finally a test with Vipre in it :D

    MSE clears test but MS Forefront fails o_O Don't they use same engine/defs ?
     
  3. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
    And it seems we made a good bet for our money. :D

    P.S.: Poor Twister... Even if they manage to get 100% detection, with v.7 engine, it will still fail due to false positives... :'(
     
  4. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,853
    Yes, something odd going on there.
     
  5. Narxis

    Narxis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Posts:
    477
    No, Forefront is using 3 or 4 engines.

    Norman and Virusbuster is sure but i dont know about the other engine or engines.
     
  6. Brocke

    Brocke Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2008
    Posts:
    2,191
    Location:
    USA,IA
    fortinet passed? i thought that forticlient has bad detections
     
  7. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,736
    Location:
    New York City
  8. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,012
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Yes and now they are 1 for 1 in the VB test!

    TH
     
  9. antivirus22

    antivirus22 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2007
    Posts:
    32
    Location:
    Australia
    I reckon there will now be a "Storm" of Vipre Hype because they passed VB100/Wildlist that heaps of different anti virus programs pass easily.

    Standby for the deluge.

    If Vipre detection rates are as good as Avira/norton/kaspersky in something like A-V Comparatives at up around 99%, it may be a very viable alternative.
     
  10. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
    I took a quick look on your posting history and noticed you have this fixation with Vipre getting the rates of Avira/Norton/Kaspersky and repeating the same phrase about viable alternative.

    I have some points:

    1) What is not viable alternative for you, may be for someone else.

    2) There are other antiviruses in the world beyond Avira/ Kaspersky/ Norton and people use them too.

    3) So, what if Vipre is in the range of Trend Micro, Dr. Web ? Some may still like it. What if it's even lower than that? Some may still like it... All people in the world have "viable alternatives" only between 3 antiviruses?! Apparently not, that's how other AVs exist too.

    4) Let people dream and enjoy a "pass" for a new AV. I don't think anyone claimed it's Avira-class AV till now, so why anticipate and prejudge people that will come with hype about it?

    5) Just as information, partecipation in AV Comparatives doesn't come for free, last time someone who wanted to be included posted in this forum, he talked of 4 digit fee (before his post got deleted). I think for a relatively new AV in a period of crisis, that still needs to be ironed out, that's considerable money, that can't just give as peanuts to satisfy the curioucity of Wilders' members. Some more wellknown and established AVs aren't partecipating there either. So give them time.

    I would normally not comment your post, but i was a bit offended by the prejudice about the hype since i have been part of the discussion and 1 of the 2 Vipre users in this thread and the "colourful" expressions about "deluge" and "storm".

    The only diluge i see is the repeating of almost identical posts about Vipre:



    November 27 2009 :

    October 29 2009:



    March 7 2009:



    December 18 2008:



    After this i have to say:

    - I see a diluge of the same posts for over a year about Vipre.

    - It is obvious that if it gets on par with Avira/Kaspersky/Norton it MAY be a viable alternative. (If it surpasses them, i guess it will be for sure).

    - It is also obvious that for some other people, it doesn't have to become on par with the previously mentioned 3 AVs to become a viable alternative , partly because some people don't look just for detection rates for a software.

    - I don't see Vipre paying to be included in AV Comparatives anytime soon and at least after they get a stable and tested v.4. So don't keep your hopes up until then (you can close an eye :D ). In the meantime there are at least other 30 antiviruses out there, where you can focus to see when they reach Avira/Norton/Kaspersky so to have more viable alternatives.

    - Even Avira didn't become "king" overnight, so give Sunbelt a brake, they 're new in the AV sector. So they took the VB100 on their 1st attempt. Good job to them, Vipre users happy! I hope that isn't too much to say, even if it's not proven that it's on par with Kaspersky/Norton/Avira.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
  11. vijayind

    vijayind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Posts:
    1,413
  12. Edwin024

    Edwin024 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    1,000
    Where is Panda in this VB test?
     
  13. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,853
    I don't see any info anywhere about Forefront using other companies engines, got some proof behind this blanket statement?

    Also, how would extra engines reduce detection? Your answer in general makes no logical sense whatsoever.
     
  14. Fuzzfas

    Fuzzfas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Posts:
    2,753
    I can't say i am surprised. They 've a long way to go to catch up with long time players. It's a consolation that it's there, right above Symantec. :D
     
  15. vijayind

    vijayind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Posts:
    1,413
    I think the poster was referring to Forefront for MS Exchange. Which uses up to 5 engines.
    @Narxis: this VB100 test was for Win7 workstations so they must have tested MS Forefront CS. Which is single engine. But it is scheduled to get a new engine and heuristics ( codename: sterling ). Until then I think all MSE and Forefront AVs use same engine/defs.

    See here: MS forefront & MSE defs are same.
     
  16. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,853
    Oh, right yes, it uses Microsoft, Kaspersky, Norman, VirusBuster and Authentium. But even if they did test Forefront Server Security and not Forefront Client security, it doesn't explain a lower detection rate.

    EDIT: Just double checking, it specifically says Client Security so it's the exact same engine/signatures as MSE. I wouldn't mind some kind of explanation from virusbtn...
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
  17. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
  18. progress

    progress Guest

    Panda doesn't take part in most of the tests :(
     
  19. Edwin024

    Edwin024 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    1,000
    Strange. What do they have to hide? German Computer Bild have a ongoing test this year. The magazine appears every two weeks and every two weeks you see how the packages perform. Panda is in the recent top five with 99.9 percent detection. Mcfee is number one, G-Data number two, Panda three. All with 99.9. Nice fact: the magazine publishes how many nasties the packages let through:

    McAfee 108, G-Data 216, Panda 374. From then on things go really bad:

    Bullgard 99.8 - 1245, F-Secure 99.8 -1310, Avira 99.6 - 2038, Norton 99.5 - 2582 and number last in this test Kaspersky 98.4 - 8505.

    Computer Bild tests with 35000 daily anti malware, 150 PC's who scan for malware the entire day week in week out, 1 million new viruses are scanned daily and the security packages must be able to detect 260.000 new malware pieces per week.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2009
  20. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,853
  21. progress

    progress Guest

    I don't really know, maybe we should ask pbust aka Panda :D
     
  22. pbust

    pbust AV Expert

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2009
    Posts:
    1,173
    Location:
    Spain
    We haven't participated since many years ago because of certain disagreements about methodology and some non-replicable test results. We do want to participate again as soon as VB100 incorporates cloud-scanning into the methodology.
     
  23. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,012
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    As ance said Panda doesn't take part in most of the tests! Last was June 2002.

    TH
     

    Attached Files:

  24. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Webroot Product Advisor

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    12,012
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Yes I would like to see cloud base security software in the testing!

    TH
     
  25. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    You may be correct as to the methodoloby employed. However, to me just an average user, I depend upon tests, and especially AVC, to indicate the effectiveness of an AV. I expect the developers, and sales folks to sing its praises, but that is just rhetoric until I see some results that I trust.

    If an AV cannot show up well in the AVC tests I remain sceptical as to its effectiveness, and would not consider buying it.
    After all the other AVs face the same methodoligy.

    Regards,
    Jerry
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.