Why is Avast has avast slipped so badly in detection?

I'll try it this way: Avast has slipped to almost the the bottom (some months is) in detection rates. It once was near the top. How does an AV go that far backwards and what does it take to address it?

Thanks

 

It has not slipped away from me!
I love it and I will stand behind it!!

 

hey Gordon - in changed again and back to Eset v5
avast 6 (free) became real slowly here and that was not only my impression.
Emsisoft was slowest of all and others were no option
Detection of avast i ok, not the best, but ok.
for details please look at RAP http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/rap-index.xml

 

I think your being overly critical of these detection results.
Any AV with detection rates in the 90% and upwards is pretty good in my book.None are 100% reliable 100% of the time.That,s why most folks use complimentary/layered security software with their AV.

 

Agreed...and it depends on the test results you follow. Avast seems a tiny bit slower than in the past but I still like it. ESET and Emsisoft are very light as well...maybe Win7 helps.

 

While 90% may be good, 99+% is better. While I probably would not ditch Avast on the basis of the latest test, I would not choose it if I were looking to replace my AV.

Not long ago Avast was in the top three if my memory serves, but now it is next to last.
It is a legitimate question as to why it has slipped. As long as an AV runs well on my system I would rather have 99+ than 95+.

Jerry

 

Give it a month or so. Avast will be back up again and Avira will be down.

 

Avast started slipping several months ago and only slightly moved "up" (3rd from the bottom).

How and why does this happen? It would seem that most companies are doing a decent job, so I wonder what causes one to slide for several months that far down. One month is a blip, but to drop to the bottom for several is another story. (Other legit AV testing companies have also evidenced the same thing, and I never just look to one for analysis.)

 

The talk about 90% or 99% detection regarding any AV isn't true at all IMO.
Having spent the last few mouths working in PC repair center i've found machines pretty heavily infected regardless the AV with they come installed (Avast, Microsoft Security Essentials, Kaspersky, AVG, Mcafee, F-Secure, ESET, etc.), and we need to use lots of different tools to get them clean...

 

That folks is why we don't rely on one solution. Hoping that your AV detection rate is high enough to escape getting infected is shortsighted. If an Av works for you and you like it stick with it. It might have had a bad time writing signatures that month. Maybe the malware that month was a little trickier than normal. Laying your security is the best way to keep yourself safe, that and unplugging your computer.

 

True. That's why I have MBAM, and occasionally run on-line scanners, do disk images monthly and use RollBack Rx.

I was curious as to why detection rates can slip for a quarter or more, not simply a month.

 

This is probably the best thing to do. Detection rates can vary over long periods of time. I don't think that it can mean anything. Layered protection is always a plus.

 

I like Avast and have licenses but I noticed that I have found malware which was not detected by Avast. I submitted it to Avast and checked back for 2 weeks and a signature was still not added to their database. The malware I had found was really more adware/spyware than anything more serious, like a keylogger or rootkit. So maybe the detection in the adware/spyware is a little behind? Regardless, I think the overall detection is pretty good and would have no problem using Avast. I use a layered approach with any AV anyway.

 

I think the detection is ok but the protection is mediocre ... Avast should improve the behaviour blocker!!

 

Agree. Moreover, how much detection and protection av-tests are really, concretely reliable ? How much threats exixt ? 1 millions, 5 millions ....? How much reliable are the results of a test made also with 200000, 300000 samples ? results are only partial statistics.

 

Hi Dave,
[I don't think that it can mean anything. Layered protection is always a plus.]

Each of us is entitled to his opinion, but I am confident that AVC is an honest and reliable test org. Also, I suspect that you are in the minority even among knowledgeable computer types, of which I am not one.
The results of the AVC tests did mean something on the day of the test, and those results speak for themselves. Evidently over the period some ran 99%.
So when I am looking for an AV I choose the highest rated that is readily available, and runs well on my computers. I see no l good reason to roll the dice and get the one with the poorest results.

I do agree with layering, and would not trust any AV without MBAM. I have never had a virus or such malware. I would be interested in how many or some estimate of the number of systems you have cleaned that had a top rated AV ( by AVC tests) that was up to date, and running alongside MBAM. I suspect the number is zero.

I also would agree that the brain is the most important element in the equation.

Regards,
Jerry

 

Avast has been my all time Favourite, though i am using Eset Right now
I can never forget that My last format worked from January-2010 to April- 2011
with Avast installed on it without a single infection!!!!
And 4-5 Registry Cleaners . It almost felt like i have installed a FRESH OS
Start Up- less than 40 sec
Shut down- less than 20 sec

 

Actually MBAM isn't very good at all at keeping you clean, but it's fantastic in getting you clean. As to Avast, it does go up and down often on the test charts, but so do a lot of them. The tests themselves are fine, if you keep in mind that they use a set of samples. An AV might do perfectly fine with the majority of stuff out there, but just do badly on the set of samples the testers picked. These tests aren't rock solid proof of doing good or bad.

 

avast is one of the top players, independently of being payed or free.

in security u need to feel safe. if u get the feeling that u r not protected move along.

personally i m with the same AV since ages, kind of a proven trust gained.

its more of a sensation than a fact and it takes time to develope it

 

Avast detection have always been so - so. (According to tests of course)

Even though these tests are not 100% accurate you must admit they do show the AV effectiveness to some extent. I'm pretty sure none of you guys would be using an AV that gets 80% scores and fails most tests but only feels "light"

 

The last time I had an attempted penetration it was MBAM that stopped it.
Jerry

 

ot posts removed. stay on subject please. Thank you

 

So Avast is doing that bad these days?

Did not know, I am so out of the loop lately.

 

i wouldn't say doing bad but people have been expecting more from them

 

Whats up my brother? Been awhile
As soon as Agnitum cuts the new release [Outpost 7.5.2] out I will
just have their security suite..ie anti-virus and give avast! a rest for awhile
this new version should be da bomb