Watch malware infecting 6 PC's 24/7

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by CloneRanger, May 6, 2010.

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

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,833
    Here's something you might not have seen before, i havn't. Realtime malware infections, as they happen :thumb:

    bp.gif

    -http://173.14.219.57:9000/SeventyThreatLiveVideoChallenge/pages/default.aspx-

    How Does This Site Work?

    -http://173.14.219.57:9000/SeventyThreatLiveVideoChallenge/pages/Help.aspx-

    Thanks to Cudni for the heads up :thumb:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2010
  2. tobacco

    tobacco Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Posts:
    1,497
    Location:
    British Columbia
    Interesting and Thanks

    Not surprised by the Eset result as they have been living off past glory far too long and just aren't adapting good enough like some of the others are.
     
  3. kjdemuth

    kjdemuth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Posts:
    2,960
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    WOw. THats depressing. I can't believe avast and avira. Panda is kinda a surprise.
     
  4. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    well not really, if u look at the total malware in comparison with total malware on panda and avira u see its a LOT less malware thrown against them than eset, avast, etc. so the results are kind of skewed to say the least...
     
  5. crofttk

    crofttk Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Posts:
    1,976
    Location:
    Eastern PA, USA
    And you attach no significance to Total Infections Tested/Prevented?
     
  6. Durad

    Durad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2005
    Posts:
    591
    Location:
    Canada
    I think Mr. Clementi got competition :)
     
  7. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    i did look at it, but when 1 product was tested against 3x less malware, id expect it to have better chances of prevention since its been exposed to less possible things that COULD bypass it, smaller sample size is never better. and we have know way of knowing how the sample sets were chosen or which ones were used and which were not.
     
  8. crofttk

    crofttk Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Posts:
    1,976
    Location:
    Eastern PA, USA
    Well, I guess the numbers as presented beg more questions than they really answer and you are right to point out how little we know about what's behind the sampling method.

    I was just a little "thrown" by your comment about how little malware was thrown against Panda, in particular, than others when it has highest number of "Infections Prevented".

    OTOH we've seen debates ad infinitum on here about what any numbers mean like number of detections, detection rates, FP rates, how you define an "infection", and can spin the definition to make a particular software look better.

    Bleh! I guess "interesting" is about all I can say for now. I think the finer points are beyond me if I don't have alot of background information. :)
     
  9. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    agreed, all i see in this is i guess an interesting look? but thers no info really provided.
     
  10. Vladimyr

    Vladimyr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Posts:
    461
    Location:
    Australia
    The site was offline when I looked so I have only the figures on the page to go by, but a few quick thoughts.

    I don't doubt that BluePoint (and Panda Cloud) are effective products but it is not surprising that they do so well in this 'demonstration' (read: marketing tool) because the methodology is designed to highlight the strengths their own product's techniques and negate the the effectiveness of others. (surprise! surprise!)

    Each PC has BluePoint's own ""Extreme Real-Time Malware Hunting" application we've designed internally to seek out websites actively infected with malware/trojans/viruses and rogue antivirus products. This application downloads the live threat to the hard disk, verifies the threat and attempts to run or execute the threat on each given operating system protected by each antivirus product."

    Leaving aside that their own application "verifies the threat" before it is executed so anything not "verified" will not be executed which should go a long way to ensuring 100% detection for BluePoint and no scores on non "verified" malware for the competition, this method is no more "real world" than the Big Brother house!
    I can only speak for myself but in my internet "real world" (that could be an oxymoron), this is precisely the opposite to the way I operate.
    Rather than seeking out websites which are "actively infected with malware/trojans/viruses and rogue antivirus products", I'm actually trying to avoid them!
    I've also installed anti-malware product(s) that assist me in this by scanning network, HTTP, IMAP, POP, etc data and blocking identified potential threats.
    The BluePoint test negates these and others by working on the assumption that any malware that exists on the net will be executed on my PC.

    So please, interesting as this may be, let nobody think for a moment that this is any more objective than any other vendor spruiking their own product.
     
  11. pbust

    pbust AV Expert

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2009
    Posts:
    1,173
    Location:
    Spain
    Just for the record, Panda has no involvement or sponsorship of this test. In fact I just found out about it a few hours ago.
     
  12. AvinashR

    AvinashR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    Posts:
    2,060
    Location:
    New Delhi Metallo β-Lactamase 1
    Pedro,

    We all know that. But IMHO its just a new innovative marketing tricks by Blue Point...But Panda is really working nice.
     
  13. 3GUSER

    3GUSER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Posts:
    812
    +1

    Have never heard of BluePoint Security (this vendor/software) but as you say these results kind of represent the reality . ESET and Avast are the worst security products (detect less malware) , Panda and AVIRA are the greatest of the 6 shown products and they do detect more.
     
  14. AvinashR

    AvinashR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    Posts:
    2,060
    Location:
    New Delhi Metallo β-Lactamase 1
    Total Malware thrown on Panda Cloud is too high as compared to others...Collective Intelligence "Jai Ho"
     
  15. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    Yeah, definitely... You know, recently I've read a blogpost (some well-known security vendor blog) on how to design a test so that competition doesn't detect anything and your product detects 100%. Perhaps someone will dig out the link and post it here for you enlightenment :rolleyes:
     
  16. Vladimyr

    Vladimyr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Posts:
    461
    Location:
    Australia
    Pedro
    Perhaps I should have phrased my comment more carefully. The thought had not crossed my mind.
    That the methodology is skewed in favour of fast recognition is serendipitous for Panda and I suspect, somewhat annoying for BluePoint that your free product does so well in their "showcase".
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2010
  17. ALiasEX

    ALiasEX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Posts:
    240
  18. pbust

    pbust AV Expert

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2009
    Posts:
    1,173
    Location:
    Spain
    Understood, thanks for the clarification :)
     
  19. codylucas16

    codylucas16 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Posts:
    267
    When you see bluepoint on top of a test you have to realize that something is wrong. No offense, but that product is just not very good.
     
  20. kmr1685

    kmr1685 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Posts:
    62
    here goes again same marketing tactics and some against and some supporting and expressing suprises. well i will tell you something it does not matter what you use (i.e. your Anti-whatever), but only matter is how you are tunning it and using it. for eg: using M$ windows and blaming for so many loop holes in the OS itself is not great, at the same time how you are tunning it with other program and using it for what purpose that will say how good is that M$ windows OS.

    PS: i am installing my windows OS every 3 months once, becoz i am less care about virus and i am not interested in protecting my pc like my valuable one :p
     
  21. MrBrian

    MrBrian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    Posts:
    6,032
    Location:
    USA
    Keep in mind that BluePoint Security is a whitelist (+ cloud AV) product, so one would expect very good results for BluePoint Security in a test like this. I would expect that using a limited user account with Software Restriction Policies would also do quite well in this test. Left completely unanswered in such a test is how good is BluePoint Security's whitelist - e.g. how likely is it that BluePoint Security will block the installation of a legitimate program that you just downloaded from the Internet (because it's not on the whitelist)?

    Disclosure: I haven't used BluePoint Security. My comments are based solely on the product description provided for BluePoint Security.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.