Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Trident" data-source="post: 1090082" data-attributes="member: 99014">The requirements of VirusTotal include usage of command line scanner which is what VT uses. The rest is all at the vendors discretion. A lot of them deploy experimental machine learning models, not yet tested for false positives and other heuristics. Some of them produce different names, for example the Symantec Heur.AdvML.A,B,C,D in products, is renamed Malware.AI.Low confidence/high confidence, etc.Bitdefender for years has deployed an engine on VT that is nowhere to be found in official products.Oh I understand now what you mean.Well it may be possible for some action to be taken in this case, depending on how severe it is.But Kaspersky is mostly based on heuristics where every single one will identify thousands of mutations. Vendors-thiefs will just create some hash-based detection that (if fuzzy hashing is used) may last few variants.This won’t help them protect users.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Trident, post: 1090082, member: 99014"] The requirements of VirusTotal include usage of command line scanner which is what VT uses. The rest is all at the vendors discretion. A lot of them deploy experimental machine learning models, not yet tested for false positives and other heuristics. Some of them produce different names, for example the Symantec Heur.AdvML.A,B,C,D in products, is renamed Malware.AI.Low confidence/high confidence, etc. Bitdefender for years has deployed an engine on VT that is nowhere to be found in official products. Oh I understand now what you mean. Well it may be possible for some action to be taken in this case, depending on how severe it is. But Kaspersky is mostly based on heuristics where every single one will identify thousands of mutations. Vendors-thiefs will just create some hash-based detection that (if fuzzy hashing is used) [I]may[/I] last few variants. This won’t help them protect users. [/QUOTE]

Verification