AV Comparatives Real World March 2013

[Deleted member 178]

@Umbra, what AV engine did G data replace Avast with?
I have used G data several times in the past just to test it and I had to disable the BitDefender engine because it was so heavy. I figured they would get rid of BitDefender for another engine and keep Avast because it was so light.

Gdata replaced Avast by their own.

Emsisoft doesn't appear to have the same issues with their BitDefender engine. What other AV engines do Qihoo 360 and eScan use?

BD+ Avira + 3 in-house engines, and they bought Malware Defender

 

[Nomad]

Good for F-Secure. It's always been one of my favorites and got the highest score out of all of them.

 

[Fabian Wosar]

Personally they no longer live if BD engine is no longer available to them..And they going down to last position and make frienship with AHN LAB.!

It is not like we don't create our own signatures for all malware we see. It is just that we choose only to ship signatures for malware that isn't covered by the other engine we use. This has been true when we used IKARUS and continues to be true now that we use BitDefender.

If BitDefender decides to no longer partner with us (which is rather unlikely) and if there aren't any alternatives (which is rather unlikely as well, given that plenty of vendors license their scan engines to third parties), we would do just fine. Especially with these real world tests, where real world conditions are being tested. Last time I checked even our behavior blocker on its own was quite capable of keeping a system protected.

 

[Akash209]

Personally they no longer live if BD engine is no longer available to them..And they going down to last position and make frienship with AHN LAB.!

It is not like we don't create our own signatures for all malware we see. It is just that we choose only to ship signatures for malware that isn't covered by the other engine we use. This has been true when we used IKARUS and continues to be true now that we use BitDefender.

If BitDefender decides to no longer partner with us (which is rather unlikely) and if there aren't any alternatives (which is rather unlikely as well, given that plenty of vendors license their scan engines to third parties), we would do just fine. Especially with these real world tests, where real world conditions are being tested. Last time I checked even our behavior blocker on its own was quite capable of keeping a system protected.

Yeah.. You may be Right.. But the TRue is If any AV want to be saw his reputation in the Market, then he would be work very hard in his own engine and protection..

I know how Emsisoft powerful and system impact in PC.. Still the online Amore, but still some bugs and they not Ready to their own engine, may be you call Signature.. eg. Bitdefender, kaspersky,Avira; they r in no1 bcz of their own engine and they don't depent upon others!

 

[Nedim]

Bullguard also has it's own engine.

 

[DrBeenGolfing]

MSE has it's own engine, too;>)

 

[Littlebits]

Bullguard also has it's own engine.

When did Bullguard make their own engine?

Any links to info?

Thanks.

 

[Deleted member 178]

Bullguard also has it's own engine.

When did Bullguard make their own engine?

Any links to info?

Thanks.

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=2118010&postcount=3

 

[Littlebits]

Bullguard also has it's own engine.

When did Bullguard make their own engine?

Any links to info?

Thanks.

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=2118010&postcount=3

I guess this explains why it has been doing better on AV tests then what BitDefender has been doing.

Thanks.

 

[Venustus]

I like Bullguard!
Testing it, and F-secure at the moment!

 

[ZeroDay]

Official results now online http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php

 

[ZeroDay]

http://www.av-comparatives.org/compa...detection-test

 

[Amiga500]

Why is comodo never in these tests.?
How can people have confidence in their av if there are no certified tests to go by.

 

[DrBeenGolfing]

Why is comodo never in these tests.?
How can people have confidence in their av if there are no certified tests to go by.

You can see Comodo test results here.

 

[Amiga500]

Why is comodo never in these tests.?
How can people have confidence in their av if there are no certified tests to go by.

You can see Comodo test results here.

Thanks.
That doesnt look too great for comodo.:s

 

[Ink]

Because these "tests" cause more stress and panic for both vendors and consumers.

Judging a product based of high detection rates and most effective against 0-day malware is over-rated and should not be taken into consideration when choosing any one product.

PS: I'm not calling out that other security methods are better either.

Edit: User reviews are valuable, if honest and aren't biased.

How can people have confidence in their av if there are no certified tests to go by.

 

[Zurchiboy]

A lot of testers on youtube like comodo. But It doesn't score well in AV-tests in my opinion because it does require user interation and since they have Default Deny, can have more false positives which also lowers it's score in the usability part of the test.

 

[Deleted member 178]

no solutions should be tested in default mode, but in maximum setting.

 

[Littlebits]

no solutions should be tested in default mode, but in maximum setting.

I will have to totally disagree with you. Maximum settings create false positives and make the products less user friendly.

Many testing sites count off points for false positives and user-friendliness.

Maximum settings would just cause the products to get a worse review or testing score and would not apply to most users who don't know how to configure or know how to tell false positives from actual malware.

Thanks.

 

[Deleted member 178]

I have to disagree with your disagreement

For an accurate protection test (not usability or FPs), solutions must be set to their max capacity, so there is no room for discussion, no one can say "hey we score less than x because we set our product for more usability but if we set it to max we will perform better...).

When you are set to max , you can give excuses if you perform less than another solution set also to max.

see this analogy:

the french train "TGV" is reputed to be among the fastest one (if not the fastest); when they do speed test, they don't test it with wagons and passengers but just the locomotive.

You do tests not for please the users but for testing the solution potential to protect.

usability and protection are not supposed to be tested together, but separately.