Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Security Statistics and Reports
AV-Comparatives Real-World Protection Test Jul-Oct 2023
Message
<blockquote data-quote="simmerskool" data-source="post: 1065359" data-attributes="member: 61091"><p>by some correlation I meant (or thinking) the more sensitive the AV engine & its settings are, the more likely the AV will "detect" malware, but also more false positives too... skimming the chart, Avast did detect 100% but had 2 false positives, F-Secure 100% with 18 fp, Norton 99.8% w/ 17 fp, TrendMicro 100% w/ 35 fp. If ESET had a few fp, might then also have more valid detections, or is that concept apples & oranges <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite132" alt=":unsure:" title="Unsure :unsure:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":unsure:" /> Eg perhaps ESET could tweak its code, catch 100% but with 5 or 10 fp... <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite132" alt=":unsure:" title="Unsure :unsure:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":unsure:" /> I have in no way "analyzed" the type of malware, the 1.8% that ESET is missing... I quickly skimmed the AV-C report again, I'm not seeing eg the type of malware getting passed ESET. Sorry if I missed it, I need new eyeglasses and the first appointment is not until January.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="simmerskool, post: 1065359, member: 61091"] by some correlation I meant (or thinking) the more sensitive the AV engine & its settings are, the more likely the AV will "detect" malware, but also more false positives too... skimming the chart, Avast did detect 100% but had 2 false positives, F-Secure 100% with 18 fp, Norton 99.8% w/ 17 fp, TrendMicro 100% w/ 35 fp. If ESET had a few fp, might then also have more valid detections, or is that concept apples & oranges :unsure: Eg perhaps ESET could tweak its code, catch 100% but with 5 or 10 fp... :unsure: I have in no way "analyzed" the type of malware, the 1.8% that ESET is missing... I quickly skimmed the AV-C report again, I'm not seeing eg the type of malware getting passed ESET. Sorry if I missed it, I need new eyeglasses and the first appointment is not until January. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top