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
Inactive Support Threads
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
Security Statistics and Reports
AV-Comparatives Anti-Phishing Certification Test 2019
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Burrito" data-source="post: 823858" data-attributes="member: 72439"><p>Yeah, that's really too bad.</p><p></p><p>In the AV testing business, it's been common practice for a long time that a vendor can pay to hide test results.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>The AV testing organization Dennis Labs <a href="http://Link%20to%20Dennis%20Labs" target="_blank">dennistechnologylabs.com/external/</a> demonstrated that there is not an excess of business in the testing industry. They went out-of-business. And Dennis did some good work. </p><p></p><p>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..</p><p></p><p>I propose that MT allows a little advertising to pay for tests.... real tests.... everything gets published. </p><p></p><p>That is all.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Burrito, post: 823858, member: 72439"] 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 [URL='http://Link%20to%20Dennis%20Labs']dennistechnologylabs.com/external/[/URL] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top