AV-TEST Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) AV.TEST test January - June 2025

[ForgottenSeer 114717]

Some concerns about this test:

1. shocking bad results for ESET - GDATA

GDATA is terrible in some protections. Protecting against ATP is not an area that GDATA invests in. The results for GDATA are not surprising.

Some concerns about this test:

1. the deviation between Avira - F-secure (i think deepguard is dead ).

DeepGuard no longer exists.

Some concerns about this test:

1. Another absence for Emsisoft...

Emsisoft does not want to pay for the tests and will not participate.

Well as soon as the USGovernmentget'stheirshittogether. I'm putting Kaspersky back on.

Not going to happen unless Eugene Kaspersky moves the company out of Russia and fires half his staff (due to direct or indirect ties to FSB or other intelligence services). Even then, I do not think the U.S. Government will ever allow Kaspersky. Eugene Kaspersky has too close of a relationship with the FSB. This is all publicly known and confirmed. What the FSB requests of Eugene, he does.

Seems like McAfee and ESET have switched places.

Advanced Threat Protection Test 2024 - Consumer

AV-Comparatives' Advanced Threat Protection Test 2024 for Consumer security products released, testing the protection against advanced attacks

www.av-comparatives.org

View attachment 290755

Comparing how AV performed in AV-Comparatives to AV-Test results is like comparing a cow and chicken. Both are mammals, share a basic mammal biology/physiology, both are farm animals, eat, and #####. Other than that, they're entirely different.

 

[ForgottenSeer 114717]

ATP protections are ALWAYS behind the 8 ball. The vendors are in constant "catch-up" mode to protect against ATPs. Some ATPs are difficult enough to protect against that the vendor doesn't even try.

They don't tell you that in their marketing infos (which these tests and the results are entirely for marketing purposes).

 

[Victor M]

cow and chicken. Both are mammals,

mammals have tits don't mind me, sex overriding brain

 

[Digmor Crusher]

Both are mammals

Are you sure about that?

 

[lokamoka820]

Since Microsoft Defender scored a perfect score, why use another antivirus?

 

[ForgottenSeer 114717]

Are you sure about that?

OK. Chickens are more reptiles, than mammalian. Let's just say they're warm-blooded, vertebrate reptiles.

Since Microsoft Defender scored a perfect score, why use another antivirus?

Because perfect scores in any single test mean very little as they are not true indicators of overall protections. When fully tested across different testing scenarios and methods, Microsoft Defender is at the bottom of the overall results.

 

[piquiteco]

This can quickly be worked out by looking at the last column, max protection score. Naturally, 3 successful tests have more weight than 2 though. Every test consists of 10 attacks.

Finally, McAfee is in first place, battling Kaspersky for the top spot. I hope it stays that way. I'm glad that McAfee is finally showing significant improvements in its product.

 

[Andy Ful]

When fully tested across different testing scenarios and methods, Microsoft Defender is at the bottom of the overall results.

I cannot see the evidence for such a conclusion. From my experience, MD (with a web browser extension) is better than average when AVs are tested on default settings.
In many tests, it can score as good as top AVs.

 

[Sorrento]

A test regardless of right & wrongs worth putting into the big mix of conclusions.

 

[Parkinsond]

When fully tested across different testing scenarios and methods, Microsoft Defender is at the bottom of the overall results

The same test of the current thread, few months ago, showed MD at the top, unless you refer the test is invalid, and consequently K and McAfee are not top products according to its latst version!

 

[harlan4096]

Few months ago? More than 1 year ago -> June 2024...

 

[Parkinsond]

Few months ago? More than 1 year ago -> June 2024...

13 security products in an endurance test: here are the best packages for Windows

Many consumer users don't see themselves as being in the crosshairs of cybergangsters. A major fallacy: because attackers are constantly foraging for interesting data, passwords or e-mail log-in details. This also includes entire Windows systems, as attacking botnets are always on the lookout...

www.av-test.org

 

[harlan4096]

The pic You posted says clearly June 2024

Still November 2024, almost 1 year old...

 

[Trident]

Few months ago? More than 1 year ago -> June 2024...

And Kaspersky and McAfee are still top products, they participated only in one/two tests but still got the top marks.

 

[Parkinsond]

The pic You posted says clearly June 2024

Because you did not spend minutes to read the report

 

[Trident]

13 security products in an endurance test: here are the best packages for Windows

Many consumer users don't see themselves as being in the crosshairs of cybergangsters. A major fallacy: because attackers are constantly foraging for interesting data, passwords or e-mail log-in details. This also includes entire Windows systems, as attacking botnets are always on the lookout...

www.av-test.org

View attachment 290779

Here in this test, again for 6-month period and tested against 5000 trojans, Kaspersky, Eset, F-Secure and McAfee scored 18 points (6 for protection, 6 for usability and 6 for performance).

 

[Andy Ful]

There is no need to compare particular tests, because the differences in scores between tested products are too small (and often pretty much random) to be sure that one product is significantly better in the wild than 10 others.
Furthermore, most of the differences probably depend on the different design of "default settings" chosen by vendors. In the case of Microsoft Defender (MD), the vendor chose a very limited design of "default settings" as compared to some other vendors. In default settings, Microsoft chose usability over security.
Objectively saying, it would be hard to expect that the protection provided by MD on defaults should always be at the top level.

 

[Andy Ful]

Our discussion about the small differences in AV tests can be slightly out of reality if we look at how popular Fully Undetectable malware is and how poor AV protection is in businesses. The excellent test results are in contradiction to practice.
Choosing the right AV is not easy and can depend on many factors, which can be more important than small differences in tests.
Of course, choosing the AV with the best scores is still OK if one likes this AV also for other reasons.

 

[Parkinsond]

Our discussion about the small differences in AV tests can be slightly out of reality if we look at how popular Fully Undetectable malware is and how poor AV protection is in businesses. The excellent test results are in contradiction to practice.
Choosing the right AV is not easy and can depend on many factors, which can be more important than small differences in tests.
Of course, choosing the AV with the best scores is still OK if one likes this AV also for other reasons.

I praised McAfee for topping the last edition of the test results; did not even mention MD.
Bazang stated MD performs not good in tests; I included the edition before the last one of the same test showing MD topping the results

 

[Harputlu]

There was so much praise for Mcafee on the forum that I bought a year of Total protection. The program is extremely light. I like the new features that my friends shared. I will continue to use Mcafee on the laptop because of its lightness and protection success. I sold my desktop last month. I will collect a desktop again towards the end of the year. I use nothing but Kaspersky on the desktop. In terms of protection features, it is the only program that has not left the top for years in my opinion. I live in Turkey, so I believe that every antivirus program protects the interests of its own country. In American company products, I think they protect the interests of their own country and leave a back door if necessary. That's why Kaspersky and McAfee are the same for me