Virus.gr test - NOD32 much better

Discussion in 'NOD32 version 2 Forum' started by pykko, Jan 22, 2006.

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

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    Even if some will say this is not a reliable test, I've seen NOD32 got better results than in the previous test. Place 7 and 88.79% vs. place 18 and 85 % detection.

    Great work ESET! ;)
     
  2. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    It is clear enough from AV-Comparatives that NOD has improved in malware detection since v2.12....I still would not trust any test from virus.gr though. The collection is still not proper enough.

    But, I do see Eset has improved a lot for ITW as well as zoo malware detection and heuristics, for which I congratulate them for doing a great job. :)
     
  3. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    Well, yes...perhaps virus.gr is not so reliable but I've seen 2 similitudes with av-comparatives.org tests. :D
    In both NOD32 gained 3 % from the previous test and also in both it's not so good yet in detecting trojans-backdoors, but the huge amount of updates from January plus the 2 AH incrementions hope solved a little the issue. :)
     
  4. kjempen

    kjempen Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    Posts:
    379
    :rolleyes:

    According to this test (virus.gr), NOD32's trojan detection is way better than dedicated anti-trojan products such as: A-Squared, Trojan Hunter, The Cleaner etc., and even Ewido. McAfee and BitDefender were the only AV scanners that beat NOD32 in this area (besides the Kaspersky-engined products). AV Comparatives' test also show that NOD32 is one of the best in this area (above 90% detection of trojans/backdoors).

    Also, from personal experience (trojan collecting and hazardous net surfing habits), I'd say NOD32 is very, very good at detecting trojans.

    So I wonder what made you draw this conclusion?

    EDIT: I'm not saying there's no room for improvement in this area, I do believe there still is. But it isn't really NOD32's weak spot, which (IMO) is rootkit detection/removal and maybe spyware/adware detection. I'd like to see how it compares to SpySweeper f.ex. when it comes to spyware/adware detection.
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2006
  5. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    Well, kjempen, you're absolutely right!

    It detects Trojans and Backdoors.... ( I tell it also from personal experience ;) ), but I was just wanting to say it's room for better here and missing 6000 trojans versus 1 or 200 for Kav is a difference.

    Anyway, they have made really big updates this months + 2 AH updates, so they're improving. No need to fight on this. :p
     
  6. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    Where did you take the number 6000 from ? o_O
     
  7. ctrlaltdelete

    ctrlaltdelete Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2005
    Posts:
    318
    Location:
    NL
  8. ctrlaltdelete

    ctrlaltdelete Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2005
    Posts:
    318
    Location:
    NL
  9. illukka

    illukka Spyware Fighter

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    633
    Location:
    S.A.V.O
    the trojan part of virus.gr test is especially flawed, i have explained this in another thread here, and FYI, the maker of the test confirmed

    which antivirus is good in rootkit removal?
    i can only think of f-secure, and even it has a separate product integrated. a product which requires a lot of knowledge and expertiseto use succesfully i might add
     
  10. kjempen

    kjempen Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    Posts:
    379
    Yes, the virus.gr test is flawed, I know (trojan server-detection vs detection of everything else included in a trojan "package"). That's why I also mentioned AV-Comparatives which is a bit more professional and "correct" (performed in co-operation with AV vendors).

    As for rootkit detection/removal, did I say anywhere that NOD32 was weaker than any other AV in this area? No, I didn't. I just stated that this is a weak spot for NOD32, and the same probably goes for all/most AVs out there. I may be wrong (or not) but to me it seems a bit that rootkits are a growing threat (see f.ex. the Sony rootkit troubles), and it would be nice to see my favorite AV keep my PC also safe from this :thumb:
     
  11. illukka

    illukka Spyware Fighter

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    633
    Location:
    S.A.V.O
    yep rootkits are a growing problem, yes indeed ;)

    thats why prevention is the key.. nod with advanced heuristics can nail many( usually most..) rootkit installers before they have a chance to infect
    if you're usin an app like process guard its almost impossible for a rootkit to install ;)

    once a rootkit is installed it can really be a b***h to remove
     
  12. dvk01

    dvk01 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Posts:
    3,131
    Location:
    Loughton, Essex. UK

    In my experience Nod is as good as any other AV and better than many when it comes to detecting and preventing the install of adware/spyware BUT along with all AV's it is NOT designed to be an anti-adware/anti-spyware program and won't clean up all the NON malicious dross that spysweeper or other dedicated applications will

    I am tallking about things like cookies and and non active parts of the scumware

    Nod is probably better than SS in preventing installation of much of the newer spyware which are using trojan/viral/worm techniques to install the stuff because AH is detecting many of the methods that the scum use to install so preventing the installl in the first place

    BUT SS is better at removing it if it gets installed on the system

    That is NOT to say that NOD doesn't remove much of it but by design it won't detect or look for the non active and non infectable content ( cookies, text files, uninstallers, etc etc etc )

    I use SS & NOD as well as others and spend up to 16 hours a day fixing malware ( spyware & adware) on computers and several times recently NOD has saved me when I have visited a site that attempted to download malware on my computer and warned of the malware before it was able to install

    Nod's AH detected the exploits & blocked them
    OK I am fully updated and hope that they wouldn't be able to install BUT I would prefer not to take that chance and if NOD blocks at source that is way better in my book than fixing afterwards
     
  13. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    Well, actually there were 6450 in the archive to which ctrlaltdelete posted the link. :D

    But illukka's post explain everything. ;) An NOD is good at detecting Trojans. AV-comparatives test showed that.
     
  14. enduser999

    enduser999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Posts:
    418
    Location:
    The Peg
    I noticed that in virus.gr NOD32 came in 10th in their August 06 tests.
     
  15. Megachip

    Megachip Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Posts:
    243
    Rank Antivirus - Detected using only heuristics

    1 Nod32 2.51.30 - 41503
    2 Vba32 3.11.0 - 32911
    3 VirIT 6.1.9 - 16469
    4 AVG 7.1.405 Professional - 13624
    5 AVG 7.1.405 freeware - 13624
    6 Rising AV 18.41.30 - 12214
    7 McAfee 10.0.27 - 10708
    8 Ikarus 5.19 - 7191
    9 F-Prot 6.0.4.3 beta - 6247
    10 Ukrainian National Antivirus 1.83 - 5506

    :D :D :D
     
  16. Stefan Kurtzhals

    Stefan Kurtzhals AV Expert

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Posts:
    701
    LOL, stop posting that nonsense Virus.gr "heuristic" test. According to his testing method, an antivirus program that detects more samples with signatures has a bad heuristic. Sounds logical, no? :rolleyes:
     
  17. tsilo

    tsilo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Posts:
    376
    :D Doas AVG have heuistic detection ??

    :rolleyes: I think NO!
     
  18. Megachip

    Megachip Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Posts:
    243
    A virus scanner with no heuristics ?
     
  19. tsilo

    tsilo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Posts:
    376
    YES!!!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.