Spawn

Administrator
Verified
Staff member
I'm surprised, Microsoft Security Essentials did better than AhnLab and Vipre. Avast's current Behavioural Shield doesn't do much, which is disappointing seeing how long it's been available in the product.
 

Littlebits

Retired Staff
3link9 said:
Correct me if i'm wrong but I thought MSE didnt have Heuristic/Behaviour protection?
It has Heuristic but the behavioral is a part of UAC and SmartScreen which is somehow never included in testing sites.

That's why I believe these testing sites purposely try to give MSE/ Windows Defender a bad score to support their paid sponsors. UAC and SmartScreen are a part of the real-time protection. If Microsoft would add these components into MSE and Windows Defender separate from Windows, testing sites would have to test these features as well.

To myself, testing MSE/Windows Defender without UAC and SmartScreen is almost the same as testing other AV's with half of their real-time components disabled.

Is it just me or is the results from AV-Comparatives starting to look worse than ever before?

First example: According to the test results BitDefender has few false alarms, but Emsisoft and Gdata has many false alarms??

But when I do a system scan with Emsisoft, about 95% of the false alarms come from the BitDefender engine.

According to my observations, BitDefender is the total king of false positives compared to all of the other engines.

It is very suspicious that it has the highest detection rate also, I had a customer who bought their system in that was so badly infected it took almost 10 minutes to boot. After I checked out their system in detail, I discovered that it had BitDefender Internet Security 2013 fully operational and updated, along with a total of 48 malwares running in the background. BitDefender not detecting anything. Avast removed 23 of them not detected by BitDefender and MBAM with Hitman Pro removed all the rest except 4 which required manual removal.

It is also very strange that my customers that use other solutions then BitDefender always have less infections.

I believe either AV-comparatives and the other testing sites are getting paid to fake results for BitDefender or they are just using a bad sample pack to test the products with. From what I have heard, BitDefender doesn't clean up their database of old malware like other AV vendors do.

Using older samples could make BitDefender appear to have better detection rate.

Enjoy!! :D
 

Spawn

Administrator
Verified
Staff member
They're bringing Behaviour Monitoring to Windows Defender in Windows 8.1
http://malwaretips.com/Thread-Ramping-up-security-in-Windows-8-1-Black-Hat-2013
 

MalwareVirus

New Member
I agree with Littlebits
There is nothing free in this world if you see deeply,why these site shows their result openly for everyone.
I used MSE on win xp Sp3 before 2 years & it worked perfectly.But with Windows 7 UAC it becomes more strong.
 
Top