Why is Dr. Web Not Known More Widely?

This is a great security product. I found out about it years ago when Trustport used to have a Dr. Web antivirus engine. Most of the hits I got when I had Trustport were due to Dr. Web, not AVG or Bitdefender. (Back then it had THREE av engines!)

At the point when I was finishing my subscription to Trustport I noticed they eliminated the Dr. Web engine, so I went ahead and purchased a one-year subscription of Dr. Web Security Space, version 6. It was always flawless in its execution and kept my computer safe. It has now been upgraded to version 7, and it is still a great security solution (although admittedly there was an early bug in the version 7 firewall which was blocking Internet connection, which has since been fixed).

Anyway, any thoughts on Dr. Web? It appears to me to be an exceptional security solution for personal computers.

 

Dr. Web has probably been one of the most discussed antivirus programs on Wilders! You have to do a search--although the search box seems to have problems with searching the very short words in the title. Maybe someone else can offer assistance in linking you to the past threads on Dr. Web, which are exceedingly numerous, I think. (Risl or Chris, are you still tuning in?)

 

There are many things to be said(maybe others care to elaborate) but to keep it simple...Because of bad marketing and they pulled out of every known test out there.

 

The only way I can think of finding the many threads is by searching for threads by certain members, specifically Risl and C.S.J., as they were both deeply involved in posting their experiences with Dr. Web. I cannot figure out how to search for "Dr. Web," so this may be the only way. Good luck!

 

To search for shorter words such as Dr. Web go to the search engine you prefer and type "site:wilderssecurity.com Dr Web" and that should help.

 

wildersecurity should be wilderssecurity

 

Sorry about that fixed.

 

Thanks, Ibrad! That will help me a great deal in future searches!

 

Here is some threads of DrWeb.

www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=224165&hig
www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=133462&hig

 

Still here

The discussions/new threads about Dr.Web slowly started to fade away because they don't participate in testing anymore. If they do, it's a Russian test and then the debate begins if the test is reliable or not. They simply don't get the publicity through testing anymore, which seems to be pretty important for antivirus products. There are no public statistics or evidence that it actually works, but only stories from their users. It is more convincing for the average joe if the detection percentages, certificates and awards are there. Dr.Web apparently walks their own paths and some may respect them for it and some may not.

The good:

The product itself is my safe place from unnecessary features and bloat. Has been since 2006 or 2007. Minimalistic and trouble free, that's how I would describe it. For me it's just install and forget. I believe the Dr.Web av-engine and other features under the hood are very capable and they release signature updates atleast once per hour. The detection rates are better if compared to what it was few years ago because they started to use automatic systems to process submitted files. This is why the av lab reacts faster and releases more signatures per day. My estimation is that currently their detection rates are not lagging behind the competitors, like it used to be back then.

The bad:

The development of new features and implementation of major changes is very slow. For example, we are still waiting for the faster scan engine (that is in beta) that has been discussed and demanded by users for a very long time (years?). They often release bug fixes and small improvements here and there. It doesn't mean much to the audience when they read product update news that some protection components now interact better with each other and compatibility with something has been improved. Some competing products have gone through two complete generations / version numbers and included many new features, while the developers at Dr.Web have perfected their anti-rootkit module and curing routines for example.

The ugly:

Yes, it's still somewhat ugly but bearable.

 

I think AV-Test .org tests them and possibly Virus Bulletin.

 

Beside Development is slow as a snails dont help the doc.

 

PCSL Total Protection Test (2010 July Report)

I don't too much rely on what the test report says. Dr. Web is good in detection in my experience and that's it.

 

dr. web gives a lot of FP's .....in cureit ........in hmp file goes in cloud and the result shows all clean except dr. web flagging it....uploading a file in virus total and many gives clean but dr.web flags it along with some others giving unrated........

 

Why is Dr.Web Not Known More Widely?

Dr.Web was popular, here. (Especially in the 2007-2009 period)
When they left from major Tests, their Popularity dropped.
Slow Scanning-Speed has been a problem, too.

 

Av-test never tested dr web and virus bulletin...the last vb100 test for dr web was in 2008. The only site that tests dr web that I know of is anti-malware-test.com witch is a Russian site and always in the first two positions is either kaspersky or drweb...

P.S. I don't want to bash drweb. in my opinion is a very good av with good detection rates you can't go wrong with it.

 

Drweb is a very good product. the problem IMHO is that the multi user licenses are quite pricey compared to the other solutions.

 

Your right of course. sgo9 had the link I was looking for.

 

What is the point of all the info provided at http://live.drweb.com/ ? They even list analysts' names and the types of bad files they have either found or are chasing. I guess it also shows when a new update is about to be released.

 

I know their live CD is good. I keep it in my SARDU USB. It is also supposed to be good at cleaning files infected by file infectors like Sality, though it is usually best to just format.

As far as the AV product I'm not sure.

 

I can quote the main developer of DrWeb:

The original message