About Qihoo's QVM AI Engine

[RoboMan]

I find it an interesting article. I think many opinions here rely on their opinion of the software rather than on the article itself. Everybody here knows, or almost everybody, Chinese Companies Marketing Strategies have always been intrusive and user-dependant. This doesn't necessarily mean they're harmful. The article by itself has clear no intention of educating users since it provides no useful information on how to protect or avoid potentially unwanted situations. Still, it more of a "Hey, look at me, i worry about you, choose me and you'll be safe" thing. I find it a nice campaign style. If somebody feels attracted to this, will probably download and use their products, which is exactly what companies look when writing articles such as this. And, as every other article on the internet, is 30% information, 70% trick words to make you interest on them.

 

[ZeroDay]

FP's?????????still protected

Unless it's being used by a new user who doesn't know it's a FP.

 

[nikos200]

here is a video by cruelsister ...you can see how 360ts performs Video Review - Qihoo Total Security- a Mechanistic Protection Test

 

[AtlBo]

Unless it's being used by a new user who doesn't know it's a FP.

This is true, but couldn't it be possibly said of a security program that its FPs were all warranted and presented in good judgement? Could I be asking of a security program that it read my mind? I haven't run across a FP in 360 yet that I would say was foolishly presented. The reason is that a combination of factors make the choice a risk from a security perspective. 360 for me is right on the mark with its warnings and blocks, although I do want to be careful about coming across as a fan boy. That said, I guess I am a fan of the work, but I hope this is because of competence in the program that I see rather than marketing.

Because they said that Qihoo cheated and lied in tests, after that they notice that they messed up and started testing Qihoo again and people called them out because of it and all the articles about Qihoo cheating so they don't test the EN version and they only test the CH version.

The bad part is that the EN version is now better then the CH (more updates and components).

I have thought hard about this. I feel that Qihoo was pressed too hard over this cheating issue. All they did was enable for the test Bitdefender and Avira engines that can be enabled VERY easily by a user. Is this so bad honestly? I don't feel so. Maybe they should have asked or said something before the testing, idk.

 

[minegroasprilla]

So, in conclusion: Qihoo 360, good or bad solution?.

 

[RoboMan]

So, in conclusion: Qihoo 360, good or bad?.

Depends how good or bad is the user behind it.

 

[AtlBo]

So, in conclusion: Qihoo 360, good or bad?.

Very good I believe and improving. It is a pure a-v program, which should be remembered. For this it is very good, considering the behavior monitoring capabilities. Still need a firewall strategy though.

 

[jamescv7]

@minegroasprilla: Well Qihoo's performance is already far to said it bad.

Perhaps in other aspects where Qihoo may suffer some disadvantages but overall, a good product.

 

[AtlBo]

@minegroasprilla: Well Qihoo's performance is already far to said it bad.

Perhaps in other aspects where Qihoo may suffer some disadvantages but overall, a good product.

Do you mean that the program uses too many resources? I haven't noticed this. Presently, I have it installed on 4 PCs, even on an old Pentium 4 1.5 GHz computer with 1.125 GB of RAM. This is also with the Bitdefender and Avira engines enabled btw. I replace avast on two of the PCs, and it uses noticibly less processor-wise resources. Haven't noticed anything unusual about memory usage to speak of to date.

 

[Wave]

I've used Qihoo since the Internet Security, it's really good, the QVM is one of the best I've seen so far. I see a lot of people that don't know what they are talking about, QVM and other modules make this product really good. Just look at the Sponsored State Attacks, Qihoo detected almost all of them or look at the last test done by AvLab.pl, Qihoo protected against almost everything, this article is not about marketing or lies.

@Wave can you prove what you are talking about or just saying because you don't like the product (or you don't know what you are talking about)?

Well okay then, thanks for sharing this super helpful information... I can see you are a very happy user of Qihoo and also a fan, whether I like the product or not is irrelevant to the post I made, if you want to see "proof" then try re-reading the article and my post a few more times, but good luck with that.

Try this: Advanced English lessons & then the rest is self-explanatory; use the Advanced section because you are an advanced user.

Not sure why this was called for, but all antivirus vendors talks about their distinct technologies on their site. It's not called marketing, it's called educating their users.

It is both, since it is exaggerated, therefore it falls into marketing. At the same time of educating users about their technologies, they use marketing techniques to help push new readers into downloading and using their product.

 

[Deleted member 2913]

So, in conclusion: Qihoo 360, good or bad solution?.

Its an OK product for me.

Its FPs prone & semi-HIPS is not for average users. And users who know to allow/block alerts, there are better free products out there.

 

[Wave]

Its FPs prone

This was probably intentional, it makes their product appear "better" in tests by both home users and businesses. I wonder when there will be a blog post on this too: "Download Qihoo products today because we have 76% FP detection rate so we will catch all malware"

Honestly I fully agree with their article, I am going to download Qihoo IS right now and install it. Thanks Qihoo team!

 

[Deleted member 2913]

here is a video by cruelsister ...you can see how 360ts performs Video Review - Qihoo Total Security- a Mechanistic Protection Test

Video shows how products mechanism reacts/protects against threats.
A product protecting against all the threats in the video doesn't mean any/all users will be protected, it depends on the products user dependability & users action on that.
As per security software videos, Comodo would be on the top, if we take AV/IS in the consideration But that doesn't means Comodo can protect all the users, as not all users can use Comodo effectively.

In the same video, just add few safe programs along with the malware samples & replace cruelsister with an average user, you will see totally opposite results

 

[Wave]

Video shows how products mechanism reacts/protects against threats.
A product protecting against all the threats in the video doesn't mean any/all users will be protected, it depends on the products user dependability & users action on that.
As per security software videos, Comodo would be on the top, if we take AV/IS in the consideration But that doesn't means Comodo can protect all the users, as not all users can use Comodo effectively.

In the same video, just add few safe programs along with the malware samples & replace cruelsister with an average user, you will see totally opposite results

The video proves nothing, it's meant to be taken with a grain of salt, but of course it is Qihoo so it has to be the absolute best. Sorry guys I was wrong, there IS a best security product... Qihoo IS hands down!! No shady marketing, full malware detection and amazing privacy! Sounds awesome doesn't it? That's because it is! I am educating all the users right now, no marketing over here..

@Ramona Was this better for you?

 

[ZeroDay]

AtlBo, I'm not saying a security program should read your mind. I installed Q360TS a couple of day's ago to try it out yet again, It uploaded and then deleted a few files belonging to Malwarebytes, there was nothing in Malwarebytes quarantine it actually deleted some program files belonging to MBAM. As I said I don't expect any security software to read my mind but Malwarebytes is an extremely well known piece of software. Q360 does indeed suffer from a lot of FP's no mind reading needed. I'm not doubting its effectiveness as an AV, it is indeed a very good product. However, due to the amount of, and kind of FP's like MBAM I would no longer feel comfortable installing it on a non tech savvy users computer. Due to the FP's there are better free options for less tech savvy users imho.

 

[nikos200]

Video shows how products mechanism reacts/protects against threats.
A product protecting against all the threats in the video doesn't mean any/all users will be protected, it depends on the products user dependability & users action on that.
As per security software videos, Comodo would be on the top, if we take AV/IS in the consideration But that doesn't means Comodo can protect all the users, as not all users can use Comodo effectively.

In the same video, just add few safe programs along with the malware samples & replace cruelsister with an average user, you will see totally opposite results

i love comodo autosandbox....but they have bad av!!!

 

[Der.Reisende]

i love comodo autosandbox....but they have bad av!!!

Qihoo will run nicely alongside both CF and CIS - at least to my short experience

 

[Wave]

Any Chatting Apps care about your Privacy and Have Encryption? - 360 are talking about privacy now, well they are the experts of course on this topic.

Damn, I love Qihoo so much, they are so great.

 

[XIII]

A question for those that do trust Qihoo:
If I develop a security suite that has >50% false positive, it blocks the majority of bad files, but also the majority of good. Have I made a good security suite?

This is the biggest thing that peeves me about Qihoo's "detection rate". Sure it's great, but it's not hard to replicate if you add the majority of files to a blacklist (and the malware files of those that pay you off to a whitelist ).

 

[photontorpedos]

Any Chatting Apps care about your Privacy and Have Encryption? - 360 are talking about privacy now, well they are the experts of course on this topic.

Damn, I love Qihoo so much, they are so great.

I don't see anything wrong with that blog-post. You're using the appeal to hypocrisy fallacy. They may not be the bastion of privacy but that doesn't invalidate the content on the blog. Just like Microsoft may not have a good track record but there's nothing wrong with them educating people on social media regarding privacy & encryption and offering them some options on doing it.