Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="cruelsister" data-source="post: 573055" data-attributes="member: 7463">Hi Guys! 1). The major point about this video (and the two preceding vids) is to attempt to replicate the 100% level (absolute perfection) that the Pro testing sites gave to certain products. Although valid points were made regarding detection from infected URL&#039;s and email attachments, it must be said that running the malware as was done in the videos is also valid, mainly because this method was part of the Pro testing methods whose methods I question. For example, AV Comparatives does some (File Detection Tests) of their tests just by running malware as I did, and AVTest states that they as a part of the test run &quot;malicious files that have been transferred from external storage devices&quot;- in other words directly running the malware. So a fail on directly running malware is still a fail and definitely would not yield perfection.Furthermore about URL and Email protection- Unless a given AV product has a specific block on a malware URL or a file that showed up in an email, in order for the system to be infected something HAS to be run locally on a system to cause the infection and running malware directly will replicate the results when a malicious URL or emailed file is not in their database. Finally about this- when a product states that they have URL and Email protection it shouldn&#039;t be assumed that they will in all cases actually protect. BitDefender has an anti-ransomware module but that didn&#039;t work out so well (another case of pretty words...).2). Why I&#039;ve been concentrating on ransomware- aside from the fact that Blackhats and script-Kiddies alike have made ransomware the fastest growing segment of malware,&nbsp; the results of the infection are &quot;in your face&quot; with no need for any sort of forensic analysis so will make a point in a more efficient (and dramatic) manner. Really finally- SolarQuest- BD would have been bypassed by a great many malware files that I have that I didn&#039;t include in the testing. In this test of those remaining on the Desktop one would have been blocked if BD was maxxed out, the others sadly not.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="cruelsister, post: 573055, member: 7463"] Hi Guys! 1). The major point about this video (and the two preceding vids) is to attempt to replicate the 100% level (absolute perfection) that the Pro testing sites gave to certain products. Although valid points were made regarding detection from infected URL's and email attachments, it must be said that running the malware as was done in the videos is also valid, mainly because this method was part of the Pro testing methods whose methods I question. For example, AV Comparatives does some (File Detection Tests) of their tests just by running malware as I did, and AVTest states that they as a part of the test run "malicious files that have been transferred from external storage devices"- in other words directly running the malware. So a fail on directly running malware is still a fail and definitely would not yield perfection. Furthermore about URL and Email protection- Unless a given AV product has a specific block on a malware URL or a file that showed up in an email, in order for the system to be infected something HAS to be run locally on a system to cause the infection and running malware directly will replicate the results when a malicious URL or emailed file is not in their database. Finally about this- when a product states that they have URL and Email protection it shouldn't be assumed that they will in all cases actually protect. BitDefender has an anti-ransomware module but that didn't work out so well (another case of pretty words...). 2). Why I've been concentrating on ransomware- aside from the fact that Blackhats and script-Kiddies alike have made ransomware the fastest growing segment of malware, the results of the infection are "in your face" with no need for any sort of forensic analysis so will make a point in a more efficient (and dramatic) manner. Really finally- SolarQuest- BD would have been bypassed by a great many malware files that I have that I didn't include in the testing. In this test of those remaining on the Desktop one would have been blocked if BD was maxxed out, the others sadly not. [/QUOTE]

Verification