anuraag Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Retrospective Comparative May 2010 released!This test evaluates the heuristic/generic detection of the products against unknown/new malware, without the need to execute it. Please read carefully the whole report. Read it here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MISSYOU Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 okk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sl@pSh0ck™ Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 this test just show how antivirus companies are losing the battle against new malwares :ph34r: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mara- Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Really poor detection. Panda, which scored the highest missed 10.000 samples.Cheers ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Proves to say that layered security and common sense is the best solution ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Owl Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Hmmm, Microsoft's free Security Essentials did very well compared to the others in this test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ehsan Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 It caused me to move from KIS 2010 to PIS 2010.......wait for now, untill a stable solution for KIS 2011 comes out :Dseems reasonable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoYB Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Things that make you go hmmm ... :think: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bashar Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 glad i'm using G-data according to the test , it's doing a pretty good job over kaspersky :dance2:Thanks , love those Tests Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motograter Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Sorry if this is a dumb question.If the on demand test which is signatures only a AV product gets say 98% and misses 2%Then on a heuristics test it catches 50%.So the 2% on demand that is missed has a 50% chance of catching those samples. Does that make it 99% effective? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tucker Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 Very informative. Thanks mate! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigabert Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 Sigh.. don't feel safe with any of the AVs.Guess common sense and experience is the most important... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 Sorry if this is a dumb question.If the on demand test which is signatures only a AV product gets say 98% and misses 2%Then on a heuristics test it catches 50%.So the 2% on demand that is missed has a 50% chance of catching those samples. Does that make it 99% effective?not necessarily.... google "Tejon Crypter 1.3". This is only a example... but show that AV's is being obsolete technology... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RushEyE Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 I love Bluepoint Security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.