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
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
Security test on the example of 400 malicious samples in the wild (November 2022)
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Adrian Ścibor" data-source="post: 1015681" data-attributes="member: 71496"><p>Hi [USER=93528]@Like a Western![/USER] I understand your opinion, you don't even know how much!! </p><p>Consider the test scenario. Browser > link with malware -> User -> AV product reaction.</p><p></p><p>AV technologies in such a scenario are very effective. Believe me, malware authors don't make an effort. They go for ease over quantity, not quality.</p><p>I'll tell you more. One vendor demands malware very spread in the wild, and another fresh sample. This is contradictory. </p><p></p><p>It is not easy to satisfy the requirements of every vendor. And the user requirements are the hardest. Do you know why? Because there is a belief that there is no AV that will stop 100% of everything. Full agree! However, in tests they stop 100% of the malware set, and you have no control over it.</p><p></p><p>You need to know more that the test is followed by a consultation. The Vendor has the right to reject the malware if it proves that it was not a threat on the system or if it was a PUP/PUA. </p><p></p><p></p><p>In 2023, there will definitely be at least one test with manual attacks. It requires a lot of work, so it is not often done. In addition, it is exactly as you wrote. One Vendor is fine with it, and others are not, because these are not "in the wild" attacks. That's why we have different tests as service for vendors.</p><p></p><p>We will publish the results from the EDR-XDR test soon!</p><p></p><p></p><p>In the CSV file, you are given all the SHA256. You can compare them to VirusTotal, for example, <strong>but keep in mind that</strong> the engines on VT may not contain all the technology you have available in the product installed on your workstation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Adrian Ścibor, post: 1015681, member: 71496"] Hi [USER=93528]@Like a Western![/USER] I understand your opinion, you don't even know how much!! Consider the test scenario. Browser > link with malware -> User -> AV product reaction. AV technologies in such a scenario are very effective. Believe me, malware authors don't make an effort. They go for ease over quantity, not quality. I'll tell you more. One vendor demands malware very spread in the wild, and another fresh sample. This is contradictory. It is not easy to satisfy the requirements of every vendor. And the user requirements are the hardest. Do you know why? Because there is a belief that there is no AV that will stop 100% of everything. Full agree! However, in tests they stop 100% of the malware set, and you have no control over it. You need to know more that the test is followed by a consultation. The Vendor has the right to reject the malware if it proves that it was not a threat on the system or if it was a PUP/PUA. In 2023, there will definitely be at least one test with manual attacks. It requires a lot of work, so it is not often done. In addition, it is exactly as you wrote. One Vendor is fine with it, and others are not, because these are not "in the wild" attacks. That's why we have different tests as service for vendors. We will publish the results from the EDR-XDR test soon! In the CSV file, you are given all the SHA256. You can compare them to VirusTotal, for example, [B]but keep in mind that[/B] the engines on VT may not contain all the technology you have available in the product installed on your workstation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top