AV-Comparatives AV-Comparatives Anti-Phishing Certification Test 2019

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Anti-Phishing test: security products published passing the 2019 test
Every year we publish the results of our phishing protection certification test. These tests evaluate the protection provided against phishing websites. These deceptive websites can pose a real threat to Internet users, as they attempt to steal sensitive information such as usernames, passwords, and credit card details.

Anti-Phishing Certification Test 2019

Every year we publish our phishing protection test, evaluating phishing protection. Take a look at the Anti-Phishing Certification 2019

www.av-comparatives.org

Results (alphabetical):
Avast Free Antivirus: 94%
Avira Antivirus Pro: 88%
Bitdefender Internet Security: 98%
F-Secure Safe: 85%
Kaspersky Internet Security: 94%
Trend Micro Internet Security: 97%

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

IMO more proof that @Evjl's Rain and @Windows_Security are right recommending the Bitdefender TrafficLight extension.
Thanks guys

 

[Zorro]

Antiphishing is an important component of antivirus. But phishing sites do not live for a long time and targeted phishing is dangerous. Therefore, it is the heuristic analysis of the site suspected of phishing content that is important. In Kaspersky Anti-Virus I know exactly such a heuristic analysis for phishing exists, but I don’t know whether it is in other antivirus programs.

 

[Moonhorse]

IMO more proof that @Evjl's Rain and @Windows_Security are right recommending the Bitdefender TrafficLight extension.
Thanks guys

I can go to phishtank with kaspersky cloud web filter + netcraft and only ones they miss are detected by trafficlight

I use blocksi over it thought

 

[stefanos]

IMO more proof that @Evjl's Rain and @Windows_Security are right recommending the Bitdefender TrafficLight extension.
Thanks guys

the last six months i am with Bitdefender trafic light. Very good protection and lite.

 

[Mahesh Sudula]

Antiphishing is an important component of antivirus. But phishing sites do not live for a long time and targeted phishing is dangerous. Therefore, it is the heuristic analysis of the site suspected of phishing content that is important. In Kaspersky Anti-Virus I know exactly such a heuristic analysis for phishing exists, but I don’t know whether it is in other antivirus programs.

Kaspersky and Bit defender have both these abilities, and they shine as a result.
They do check for a hoax site certificate, signature as well whenever look up is done apart from HEUR analysis.
Closely follows Symantec, however their anti phishing is not so effective, but improved!

 

[Divine_Barakah]

If Bitdefender just focuses on bugs and tuning their product, surely they would be a great choice.

 

[Burrito]

Anti-Phishing test: security products published passing the 2019 test
Every year we publish the results of our phishing protection certification test. These tests evaluate the protection provided against phishing websites. These deceptive websites can pose a real threat to Internet users, as they attempt to steal sensitive information such as usernames, passwords, and credit card details.

Anti-Phishing Certification Test 2019

Every year we publish our phishing protection test, evaluating phishing protection. Take a look at the Anti-Phishing Certification 2019

www.av-comparatives.org

Results (alphabetical):
Avast Free Antivirus: 94%
Avira Antivirus Pro: 88%
Bitdefender Internet Security: 98%
F-Secure Safe: 85%
Kaspersky Internet Security: 94%
Trend Micro Internet Security: 97%

Thanks Gandalf.

It's too bad... we don't know if any AVs didn't pass. AV-C does not seem to be publishing that.

We do know that Bit & Trend did best and that Avira & F-Secure were at the bottom of those capabilities published.

And I sympathize with AV-C... they are a business entity and don't want to alienate future customers. But from our perspective as consumers, it is not as helpful as it could be. We have no idea of other AVs didn't participate, or if they failed.

I don't know the full story... but it appears that SE Labs and NSS will test whether they pay or not. But I'd guess there is more to the story..

 

[uduoix]

Malwarebytes extension or bitdefender trafficlight?

 

[stefanos]

Malwarebytes extension or bitdefender trafficlight?

Malwarebytes have very good protection but is heavy and it have many FP. The choice is yours

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Malwarebytes extension or bitdefender trafficlight?

Hot Take - [Updated 29/12/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Comparison between browser extensions Test 29/12 Q&A - [Updated 29/12/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings Test 24/11 Q&A - [Updated 24/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings Test 12/11 Q&A - [Updated 12/11/2018] Browser extension comparison...

malwaretips.com

I would say Bitdefender TrafficLight.

 

[davisd]

I've never seen importance to anti-phishing tests, if you are the only user on the system, you should be able to recognize and identify legit website input forms from fake. Soccer moms better keep using these netcraft and traffic lights extensions, because if they suddenly stop working or goes off for a maintenance, most don't know how to drive properly on junction.. when lights go off, you obey the traffic signs - with that said, you should better spend time on learning safe browsing habits, not relay on the browser "security" extensions and malicious/anti-phishing filters in your security software.

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I've never seen importance to anti-phishing tests, if you are the only user on the system, you should be able to recognize and identify legit website input forms from fake. Soccer moms better keep using these netcraft and traffic lights extensions, because if they suddenly stop working or goes off for a maintenance, most don't know how to drive properly on junction.. when lights go off, you obey the traffic signs - with that said, you should better spend time on learning safe browsing habits, not relay on the browser "security" extensions and malicious/anti-phishing filters in your security software.

For most members here you are correct. It is not needed, but for me it is.
My computer is used by my wife, my son and my daughter.
My son got a phishing mail when I was not at home.
He asked my wife if the mail was legit and she said yes, so he clicked on the link.
In this case he was using MS Edge and the link was blocked by SmartScreen.
When i got home I showed them why it was a phishing mail and educated them.
So if your computer is shared by others not so into security and privacy phishing protection is needed.
Also the case when maintaining or configuring computers for older relatives.
Bitdefender Trafficlight is at the moment one of the best extensions you can use to protect against phishing and malware in a browser.

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Thanks Gandalf.

It's too bad... we don't know if any AVs didn't pass. AV-C does not seem to be publishing that.

We do know that Bit & Trend did best and that Avira & F-Secure were at the bottom of those capabilities published.

And I sympathize with AV-C... they are a business entity and don't want to alienate future customers. But from our perspective as consumers, it is not as helpful as it could be. We have no idea of other AVs didn't participate, or if they failed.

I don't know the full story... but it appears that SE Labs and NSS will test whether they pay or not. But I'd guess there is more to the story..

It gets even worse in the Parental Control Certification Test 2019.
Only 1 product passes and is shown: Kaspersky Safe Kids Premium for Windows:

Parental Control Certification Test 2019

Take a look at the only product that passed our requirements in the Parental Control Certification Test 2019

www.av-comparatives.org

Parental Control Review 2019 - Kaspersky Safe Kids

In the Parental Control Review 2019 Kaspersky Safe Kids received the 2019 AV-Comparatives Approved Parental Control Award

www.av-comparatives.org

 

[Burrito]

It gets even worse in the Parental Control Certification Test 2019.
Only 1 product passes and is shown: Kaspersky Safe Kids Premium for Windows:

Parental Control Certification Test 2019

Take a look at the only product that passed our requirements in the Parental Control Certification Test 2019

www.av-comparatives.org

Parental Control Review 2019 - Kaspersky Safe Kids

In the Parental Control Review 2019 Kaspersky Safe Kids received the 2019 AV-Comparatives Approved Parental Control Award

www.av-comparatives.org

Yeah, that's really too bad.

In the AV testing business, it's been common practice for a long time that a vendor can pay to hide test results.

And maybe it's even worse now for the testers... maybe they are afraid enough of losing business that the AVs can just threaten to pull their products from the tests of a lab if bad results are published. Just a guess... I dunno.

The AV testing organization Dennis Labs dennistechnologylabs.com/external/ demonstrated that there is not an excess of business in the testing industry. They went out-of-business. And Dennis did some good work.

What is really needed is some third party to pay for testing -- where all results are published. But Fabian (Emsisoft) has alluded to the cost of testing for vendors.... it's really expensive. So a computer magazine probably would not sponsor a test at that cost. And therein lies the problem..

I propose that MT allows a little advertising to pay for tests.... real tests.... everything gets published.

That is all.

 

[simmerskool]

If Bitdefender just focuses on bugs and tuning their product, surely they would be a great choice.

but BD business practices are suspect. Today I got an email from BD saying they autorenewed a subscription $86US that I originally made in 2016 despite the fact that I had deactivated the autorenewal on their website in 2017, have not had / used any BD av for at least 18 months, and the kicker, the renewal email said if I want a refund, go to this site and send webemail but their system would not even accept my refund request. But it was billed thru a good bank and the bank immediately contacted BD and got the charge removed. Impressed with the bank. Why would a reputable company, BD, do business like that? FUBD (although I am currently running their trafficlight in chrome ).