Would you change your AV because of this test?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Wordward, Jan 29, 2008.

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

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,102
    Location:
    North Carolina USA
    as demoneye might say, "u duds r 3ating al the bandwidth uop.''

    cheers
     
  2. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,229
    Did you not read my next post? GREED.
     
  3. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,229
    Isn't it time for you to change your AV again?

    Cheers:D
     
  4. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Just in case you haven't heard the news, we haven't found a cure for AIDS, prevent pollution, eliminate poverty, or stop wars yet either.

    And oh, we also haven't managed to teach idiots to not click on strange files in their emails or IM, either.
     
  5. Hermescomputers

    Hermescomputers Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Posts:
    1,069
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada, eh?
    You are missing my point here:

    Not that at all, for some reason "Insurance" doesn't mean $20,000 free dollars. Insurance means if I trust your product and I lost $20,000 as a result you should be responsible to cover part of that loss. My analogy of UPS's is clear damage directly attributable to the failure of said device. Besides these should be provided on a voluntary basis... Not some utopian ideal is it? If you trust in your product enough to charge $$$ to the consumers for it you should trust enough about it to provide that insurance?

    UPS's offer in the Millions of dollars in "Failure Coverage"... They are surviving nicely...

    Mmmmh... Because I refused to accept being ripped off is a beautiful thing?
    You think that one over!
     
  6. Escalader

    Escalader Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Posts:
    3,710
    Location:
    Land of the Mooses
    Short answer is NO.

    Due diligence is required and 1 test from 1 suspect site doesn't cut it.
     
  7. Hermescomputers

    Hermescomputers Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Posts:
    1,069
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada, eh?
    Ouch! Great point solcroft! ;)

    However there are solutions... Impossible doesn't exist in the context of preventing viruses.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2008
  8. Wordward

    Wordward Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Posts:
    707
    I think idiots was to strong of word here though solcroft. LOL.
     
  9. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Please tell me: how on earth is it that computer repair people like you can know so little about viruses?

    UPS manufacturers can afford to offer such a guarantee because the failure rate of their products and the factors involved in the equation can be more or less estimated, and their insurance payoff calculated such that they are still guaranteed to make a profit while giving their customers the "feel-good" factor - in fact, it's actually quite like the lottery! Not so with antivirus software - especially when one needs to factor user stupidity into the equation.

    Antivirus software are nothing but a dumb collection of algorithms that try to sort good code from bad. And like any dumb computer algorithm, it can be fooled, especially when those algorithms has to be able to identify millions upon millions of good and bad code and still make the job scaleable and manageable for the people in charge of handling and updating the algorithms. I can assure you that vendors do not take pride in the fact that their products get bypassed every time a new Storm or Zhelatin or Zlob variant appears - but this is just the sort of industry where only complete fools would dare to make guarantees about 100% protection when dozens of unknown factors are involved in the equation.

    Security is a two-way street - perhaps you should also think about not putting the blame squarely on the software products every time an infection happens.


    Or perhaps trying to cover your own irresponsibility with a bit of grandiose speech-making.

    Think it over, perhaps?
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2008
  10. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Preventing one single virus, or perhaps a handful - jesus, what could be easier? Even I could write a program for that.

    Preventing the hundreds of millions out there with 100% precision, and continue to stay on top of the hundreds of emerging ones day by day, also with 100% accuracy... let's see you do it, eh?
     
  11. Wordward

    Wordward Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Posts:
    707
    Why I do I always sense some anger in your posts solcroft? LOL. Seriously though I think I see where you're coming from here, and I agree.
     
  12. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Impatience, more like. :cautious:
     
  13. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,229
    You can only lead the horse to the water, it will drink only when it's thirsty however.
     
  14. Hermescomputers

    Hermescomputers Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Posts:
    1,069
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada, eh?
    I know a lot about viruses solcroft. I clean them every day. I use almost every anti virus product on the market while at clients, and I see what everyone is doing product wise. Perhaps I don't know everything about viruses from a software engineering perspective as per every line of codes or how specific viruses are structured internally, but I do have enough empirical basis to make my speech on this topic relevant.

    The feel good factor is endorsed by an underwriter in this case. Besides just like viruses strike randomly as you stated earlier so do lightning storms and power surges... Loosing data or productivity is no different whether it comes from lightning or a virus!


    That I easily concede, the bulk of infections are related to users clicking on something they should obviously not have...


    I think you and I had several discussions over the years related to this topic. I despise the virus developers who are the real culprits... I'm only saying the consumers are left hanging unprotected here both from corporate predators who profit without any meaningful accountability and those who pray on them mercilessly via criminal activity or by means of business.


    Don't keep attacking me personally or I'll tare you to shreds intellectually solcroft
     
  15. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    No, it's not. But the nature of attack, and one's chances of successfully stopping it are vastly different. One can be calculated and the chance of a destructive attack can be reasonably predicted, and an insurance given accordingly so that a net profit is still made, while the other cannot. Which was my whole point.

    The consumers will forever be unprotected as long as they rely on antivirus software as their primary means of defense, no matter what the vendors do. Ideals or not, that is not going to change anytime soon. One can moan about it and demand accountability - or one can recognize that fact and educate oneself about online safety measures. The thing is that corporations are largely aware of this fact, and they have multiple security policies and backups in place as their ultimate line of defense - the detection rates of the antivirus they use are usually far less important to them than how easily it can be managed, or its price. When was the last time you heard a company lose $20,000 to a virus, despite Symantec and McAfee's craptacular detection rates?

    I would suggest you learn how to spell "tear" correctly first...
     
  16. Hermescomputers

    Hermescomputers Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Posts:
    1,069
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada, eh?
    ergo my point about innovations being the prime directive for everyone right now... Since we have a proven failed technology why keep using it?

    As I stated above there are some who are looking to solve this "apparent" impasse the entire security industry is stuck in. By creating innovative products that integrate the features of old dying methods that worked with new ways of doing things... I'm a big fan of HIPS/Hybrids with separate virtual sandbox ideas (Isolating web browsing sessions and or e-mail related processes from the operating system for example). There are multiple possible solutions but so few appear to be trying to implement anything new it seems. (Major Brands)

    Please forgive my literary inadequacies and for poor spelling! :cautious:
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2008
  17. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Sometimes it isn't so much about the technology as what you do with it.

    It's perfectly possible to stay clean over extended periods of time even with a 4-year-old unpatched copy of XP, Firefox, Windows Firewall and absolutely nothing else. I'm living proof of it, and I don't think I'm the only one.

    User education, m'lad, user education...
     
  18. Don johnson

    Don johnson Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Posts:
    77
    Well,I don't trust any tests,I can't change my AV because of test resulst.There are many Storm worm/Zlob trojan/MSN virus variety every day,no av can detect all variety.
     
  19. Hermescomputers

    Hermescomputers Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Posts:
    1,069
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada, eh?
    Absolutely, this is why I am slowly moving all my existing and new clients to alternative security protocols. (Ie AV AS firewall) to HIPS, Sandbox and Intelligent Firewall... and I am having much better results with those whose computers used to be getting recurring infections... It does require some user education but it works.

    Unfortunately I don't think it's ready for mainstream consumption yet...
     
  20. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,102
    Location:
    North Carolina USA
    Hey, if it is ready enough for us "Trolls";) its ready for the sane public.
     
  21. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Looks like you're still confusing user education with security programs.
     
  22. Hermescomputers

    Hermescomputers Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Posts:
    1,069
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada, eh?
    Not really those are customers I physically manage myself.... remotely. The ones who have to do all this by themselves... well, I'm not touching this yet. :)
     
  23. jrmhng

    jrmhng Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2007
    Posts:
    1,268
    Location:
    Australia
    Actuaries definitely CAN calculate risk associated with computer security. In fact they can calculate the risk associated with pretty much anything.
     
  24. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    For a single person or organization, no doubt. For every customer of a particular vendor, especially there's never been any concrete, reliable data?
     
  25. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    Actually, I have my doubts that they would be able to provide a decent estimate. You need real data - which doesn't exist in a useable form (collected, validated, and over a large enough population) - and static or predictably changing response surface.

    Actuaries are good at predicting large population responses in areas like death since there are very good and objective records available and life expectancy is slowly changing with time. They can even provide reasonable adjustments for certain risk factors. Again, the data is there.

    For computer security? I don't see enough objective data available to do it.

    Blue
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.