AV-Comparatives Protection-Test Overview March-June 2012
- Thread starter 3link9
- Start date
- Status
there has been some ranting around regarding avast, although I am still trying to catch up with the ranting.
- Oct 22, 2011
- 860
I'm trying to catch up with it too,Biozfear said:
So far around the net I been hearing about FP's increasing (Proved in this test), Detection rates slipping, and sandbox is not working correctly.
Im a huge Avast fan and I really hope it doesn't fall!
3link9 said:
Not sure about FP's but 2 reasons I left Avast recently was Detection rates and the sanbox. Sandbox decided to sandbox my bluetooth services (out of nowhere, along with Live messenger).
That only happened on the last updated version. Reverting to previous one was even worse as I experienced random boot and shutdown slowdowns.
There is also some opinions about Panda recently from their URL Filter not detecting much as it was before to behaviour components and even detection rates.
I mean, I am fine with all that and I can always go to ESET but 2 of the new features are making me a bit sceptical too (see ESET forum in MT).
By the look of things, it looks like I will be running a companion AV on its own, which is fine since I know what I am doing...
I think Avast free performed well due to the fact that it was tested along with paid security suites.
3link9 said:
Avast 4 (good) -> Avast 5 (poor) -> Avast 6 (excellent) -> Avast 7 (????)
Hope it is not cyclic
On g data, you can choose which of the 2 signatures you want. Some users reported using one was better in terms of performance.
On my tests I used both but not to an extend of daily usage for over a few days.
On my tests I used both but not to an extend of daily usage for over a few days.
What the.... I am very impressed with avasts results. Only 21 compromises! Even the many false positives were only user dependent.
Take a look at previous results. avast 6 did worse in protection, particularly the last report.
Take a look at previous results. avast 6 did worse in protection, particularly the last report.
Now back on topic, Trend Micro had shown improvements on the AV Comparatives tests.
@McLovin how do you feel about the results for TM?
@McLovin how do you feel about the results for TM?
Earth said:
I tried but due to being in Romania, I wasn't sure what to click so I couldn't really test it. I personally didnt feel comfortable.
Any ideas when there will be an English version?
I still wonder why they are making a Romanian interface solely. There has to be a reason behind that. Could it be some sort of open testing approach?
- Apr 17, 2011
- 9,224
Biozfear said:
I personally think they did well. As everyone knows Trend is well known for it's web guard and how strong it is as for block malicious websites. It's AV signature though can be improved. I personally will stick to the opinion that if people are confronted with a dangerous page and they enter it they will be entering at their own risk. Most common users (that I have seen) would just leave that website straight away.
McLovin said:
Who says they havent improved with signatures this year?? they surely have...see: http://malwaretips.com/attachment.php?aid=1883
the fact that trend yet needs to do something on signatures as it let in ramnit on here: http://community.trendmicro.com/t5/Malware-Discussions/Trojan-Ramnit/m-p/82878#M11546
McLovin said:
Indeed their web guard is well known. If we could strip down every client and pick components form each, Trend's web guard would be amongst one that I would pick.
- Status
Similar threads
