Kaspersky and Norton FAIL

[Avitar]

They say that a picture is worth a million words right? So I'll let the picture do the talking.

Just so you know that this is NOT a false positive. It's a fake keygen I downloaded. So you might ask, well am I not infected? NO. I was even able to run the file and verify that it was a fake thanks to COMODO Sandbox and Virtual Desktop.

Kaspersky and Norton both FAILED. Interesting enough is that the built in Microsoft Windows Defender products both failed as well. If you have Bitdefender, well you're safe, but do note that it's bogging down your system.

Read up about the Comodo Internet Security, Comodo Dragon and Comodo IceDragon and Comodo Secure DNS.

=========================================================================================================

So someone recently sites the results of these "independent" tests. Nothing but a matter of who pays the most for false advertising. The real tests are the ones the average user does.

Edited February 24, 2014 by Avitar

[ffi]

So what does this conclude exactly? In much bigger tests Kaspersky reaches about 95% detection rate, were other av's score sometimes much less, which means 1/20 malware doesn't get detected

[Avitar]

So what does this conclude exactly? In much bigger tests Kaspersky reaches about 95% detection rate, were other av's score sometimes much less, which means 1/20 malware doesn't get detected

My point exactly. Comodo attained 99% detection rate in the latest tests. AND it default sandboxes apps. AND it has a virtual Desktop where malware can be tested safely. Show me a product that detects EVERYTHING and sandboxes everything else with the best privacy possible and doesn't slow down your system... FOR 100% FREE.

The 1/100 malware that DOES get through, is SANDBOXED and can be even run virtualized.

Edited February 24, 2014 by Avitar

[ffi]

Kaspersky does all that, we have no idea how well Comodo performs in AV-tests since it refuses to be included in the tests. When I used comodo I found it very intrusive with way to many notifications. If I see 3 notifications for kaspersky per year it's alot

[Avitar]

Kaspersky does all that, we have no idea how well Comodo performs in AV-tests since it refuses to be included in the tests. When I used comodo I found it very intrusive with way to many notifications. If I see 3 notifications for kaspersky per year it's alot

I put a video in the original post just for you. Again, would you rather no notification and allow a virus, or to be a non-lazy power user that every program acts based on your own choice. I'd rather the latter and be asked what I want to do.

[Holmes]

Thats one test only one no antivirus is perfect and I saw avast detected it avast gives false positives as well as detects a whole lot of shit. For your information if thats a virus total scan kaspersky got the signature so the next person that runs that test kaspersky is going to catch it. Im sure a new variant of that malware is going to get coded and what if the new variant gets detected and that one didnt my point no antivirus is perfect and comodo antivirus (comodo antivirus know how many times it failed in virus bulletin check it out) like the person said above some antiviruses dont get included the company doesnt want to put there antivirus in a test usually means its not ready yet and it is going to give a false positive or might not detect anything. Dont get me wrong comodo firewall is the best free firewall there is the antivirus lacks I have seen tests where comodo antivirus failed plenty they got lucky this time apparently.

The antivirus kaspersky does NOT fail if avast died tomorrow guess what antivirus Im using next KASPERSKY there very good there tdsskiller is one of my disinfecting tools and I have disinfected alot of computers with it. I cant believe im about to say this norton used to fail its getting better needs work a friends computer gots norton on it and norton started detecting viruses late meaning the real-time scanner is slow to detect viruses and a couple I saw were false positives. My main point is before you start attacking a antivirus or two do some homework first never a good idea to fly off the handle before you got all your facts right..

Edited February 24, 2014 by Holmes

[ffi]

Kaspersky does all that, we have no idea how well Comodo performs in AV-tests since it refuses to be included in the tests. When I used comodo I found it very intrusive with way to many notifications. If I see 3 notifications for kaspersky per year it's alot

I put a video in the original post just for you. Again, would you rather no notification and allow a virus, or to be a non-lazy power user that every program acts based on your own choice. I'd rather the latter and be asked what I want to do.

Comodo will not have 100% protection either, so yeah in that sense I rather have a quiet sensible av than one that irritates me with popups 10 times/h, kaspersky makes these decisions for me without interrupting my workflow

[unknownasphyxiated]

for me, i don't think this can be a benchmark on how well the software protect you

as you said, it's a fake keygen that might doesn't do anything except try to gain money by attracting people to download from file hosting website/survey

it might get detected due to heuristic, probably using flagged packer or doing something that av flagged as malicious

see here http://www.emsisoft.com/en/malware/?Trojan.Win32.OutBrowse.AMN

too many variant for "outbrowse", usually downloader

[captcha]

I personally think this means nothing.

There could be another malware sample which comodo doesn't detect and kaspersky does.

Its the bulk of samples which shows just the tip of iceberg and one sample means nothing.

[VileTouch]

i disagree. fine, Kaspersky didn't catch that one. norton...meh, that's kind of expected by now.

but either way, you can't rely on only ONE solution to keep you safe 100% of the time. you need several layers of protection

your practice of virtualizing unknown stuff is good. but an antivirus that is constantly virtualizing EVERYTHING you do is no good.

btw, it's your own fault downloading a noname keygen... there are plenty of well known crews out there

Edited February 24, 2014 by VileTouch

[BBs]

WOW,if an av fails for you if it misses a single trojan, then all avs are useless :)

[ande]

One should make distinction between standalone antivirus and signature based detection.

[dafmat71]

Virustotal isn't the same than Kaspersky Internet Security:

No heuristic scan, no proactive protection and no cloud databases!!

Also, i agree with ffi , Comodo is really intrusive!!!

Edited February 24, 2014 by dafmat71

[Tarik]

There is no AV that can give you 100% protection. And those tests proves nothing

[GRiM]

Why has this been put into news section???

[212eta]

Comodo detected malware that Kaspersky and Norton missed,

whereas, (in other Tests)

Kaspersky and Norton detected malware that Comodo missed.

[dafmat71]

Comodo detected malware that Kaspersky and Norton missed,

Only in VirusTotal, who's not representative of a real-time protection!!

[Mr Orus]

* Topic moved to Security & Privacy Center. I think is the right session. :)

[Cyberboom]

That's interesting :)

[avmad]

What a load of crap.

Where's the expert report for every piece of malware tested?

Who the hell is Michael M? Why such a small sample of threats?

They wouldn't even make it to the desktop with most AV's unless you turned them off! Not recommended by any company.

Who knows what your keygen really is. Run it on your system for a week and see what happens. :lol: Not in a Sandbox or VM, both which can interfere with the malware unless it's a very well written malware.

The best credited testers use millions of samples over a much longer amount of time. Youtube testers (which I used to do) can only be for entertainment value. None have the time to properly test software.

That video was sped up so much I couldn't see what was happening :lol:

Surely you posted just to troll. If you said Eset instead of Norton you'd have had a better result here.

I could find 1 sample of malware that could close Comodo down in a second! Just like I could for any antivirus. But what's the point in doing that? Everyone knows no av can detect anyway near 100%

[punkpunk]

still compare antivirus :D

[212eta]

Comodo detected malware that Kaspersky and Norton missed,

Only in VirusTotal, who's not representative of a real-time protection!!

Real-Time protection has Nothing to do with it.

Let's leave Real-Time protection aside.

The fact that Kaspersky and Norton Real-Time protection may stop a threat,

which their On-Demand Scanner failed to Detect, is another issue/story.

The Test was just an On-Demand Scan through VirusTotal.

-On the one hand, Kaspersky and Norton missed an On-Demand Scan of a malicious file

(assuming that the file was malicious and Not a False Positive...)

whereas Comodo didn't fail to detect it.

-On the other hand, there have been cases when Comodo missed an On-Demand Scan

of malicious files that Kaspersky and Norton didn't fail to detect it.

So, what?

[dafmat71]

I just said that virustotal isn't representative of a software protection!!

I think that the author, of the post, wanted to show that Comodo is better, what is absurd via Virustotal!

It's absurd to compare antivirus in VirusTotal!!

In the same time we haven't a lot info of his keygen, who's maybe a vulgar file!

Edited February 25, 2014 by dafmat71

[oliverjia]

Comodo has been a hype since its born, sadly.

Keep Kaspersky on your computer if you really care the safety of your computer.

[212eta]

I just said that virustotal isn't representative of a software protection!!

VT is representative Only of the On-Demand Scanning abilities of an AV.

Nothing more...

I think that the author, of the post, wanted to show that Comodo is better, what is absurd via Virustotal!

Agreed!

It's absurd to compare antivirus in VirusTotal!!

As a whole, we cannot compare AVs with VT, because other elements (e.g. Real-Time protection) are not included in VT. But someone can compare the Signature-based Scanning abilities of AVs via VT; just that.

In the same time, we haven't a lot info of his keygen, who's maybe a vulgar file!

Even if the file was indeed malware, this test is Not enough to prove that Comodo is better than Kaspesky & Norton! There have been cases in which Kaspesky & Norton detected files (On Demand), via VT, but Comodo failed to do so.