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
General Security Discussions
Antivirus Market Shares
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Deleted member 65228" data-source="post: 723408"><p>It depends on the vendor and how they operate.</p><p></p><p>If a vendor has data collection for things related to downloads and programs and a cloud network then the answer would be yes. If a vendor does not then the answer would be no, because it wouldn't make a difference that way. Even if logs are anonymous, if a vendor has download links which were deemed potentially "suspicious" sent back to them then they can have teams go through them and pin-point the suspicious/malicious ones and add a detection to them quicker, but without such they may not have known of the URLs for hours later or days, etc.</p><p></p><p>Let's use a cloud network as an example. New cloud uploads for Win32 executables could be sent through an automated sandbox system once uploaded even if the original cloud scan was for file reputation, and then the vendor can add a detection based on the sandbox logs a few minutes afterwards if necessary. In a scenario like this, the more users means more cloud uploads which means more Win32 executable's which were previously unknown to the cloud are becoming known... Thus making the product more reliable with detection and reducing false positives and the user being protected better.</p><p></p><p>I mean there's many scenarios but it depends on each vendor (e.g. their privacy policy and rules) and how they operate their product (including the product's feature-set).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Deleted member 65228, post: 723408"] It depends on the vendor and how they operate. If a vendor has data collection for things related to downloads and programs and a cloud network then the answer would be yes. If a vendor does not then the answer would be no, because it wouldn't make a difference that way. Even if logs are anonymous, if a vendor has download links which were deemed potentially "suspicious" sent back to them then they can have teams go through them and pin-point the suspicious/malicious ones and add a detection to them quicker, but without such they may not have known of the URLs for hours later or days, etc. Let's use a cloud network as an example. New cloud uploads for Win32 executables could be sent through an automated sandbox system once uploaded even if the original cloud scan was for file reputation, and then the vendor can add a detection based on the sandbox logs a few minutes afterwards if necessary. In a scenario like this, the more users means more cloud uploads which means more Win32 executable's which were previously unknown to the cloud are becoming known... Thus making the product more reliable with detection and reducing false positives and the user being protected better. I mean there's many scenarios but it depends on each vendor (e.g. their privacy policy and rules) and how they operate their product (including the product's feature-set). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top