AV-Comparatives AV-Comparatives Real-World Protection Test Jul-Aug 2023

[RansomwareRemediation]

View attachment 278614

Its only using like 450mb of ram after a few days, i think first couple of days it was getting used to the system.

Regardless of the MB it consumes, the number of processes in RAM is too much. They already have almost the same processes as Mcafee.

 

[Shadowra]

Yes please, substantiate your opinion with facts, how do I know you don't manipulate your videos. It are just videos, anything digital can be manipulated. How scientifcal is your (words of Cruel Sister) gang-bang approach in testing Security Software. How often are consumers faced with 1000 malwares at once? How close does your testing method resembles real world situations?

Be a sport, I applaude your tests, I like to watch them and I really value you making them, but your test don't improve in quality nor credibility when bashing AV-C.

I appreciate your input, but I still want to respond...

I don't manipulate my videos or samples. I spend a lot of time searching for links and malware samples (execution, analysis, etc.) to determine whether they are false positives or not, especially to see if the sample really has active payload. In the beginning, I wasn't always careful because I took less time to analyze them, but now I invest a lot of time in handling all of this.

It's true that I'm not a professional, and I never will be. I don't want that, and I don't want it to take over my personal life or (hopefully soon) my professional life. Making videos is a hobby that I really enjoy sharing with you all.

Unfortunately, I have my reasons for not giving any credit to AV-Comparatives, and they're not the only ones—AV-Tests as well. The only one I often trust and follow is @Adrian Ścibor (I appreciate what he does, and I've said that before), but I'm the type to test things myself

 

[Xeno1234]

First time I see Avast/AVG acing it and first time I see Kaspersky which used to always lead the pack fall back so much.

Kaspersky's detection varies on these AV Test and AV Comparatives. All individual tests I see have it practically at 100% detection, except for a few where it just gets overloaded and cant handle whats going on.

 

[Jonny Quest]

Regardless of the MB it consumes, the number of processes in RAM is too much. They already have almost the same processes as Mcafee.

I absolutely agree, and that is why I don't have BD on all of my PCs. I have a PM into Alexandru asking, reminding me of why ~2 months ago in a build update we went from 11 processes (plus WSCcommunicator) to 16 plus WSC. My notebook with Kaspersky Plus beta, is running 7 processes and the main Kaspersky Service is at 160MB as we speak. edit: Kaspersky is now at 126MB.

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

I absolutely agree, and that is why I don't have BD on all of my PCs. I have a PM into Alexandru asking, reminding me of why ~2 months ago in a build update we went from 11 processes (plus WSCcommunicator) to 16 plus WSC. My notebook with Kaspersky Plus beta, is running 7 processes and the main Kaspersky Service is at 160MB as we speak.

Kaspersky has another problem and it is also serious for me. It is the only AV that does not have a 64-bit version, regardless of whether its internal sub processes are x64. Why don't they do what Eset did before. Have an install on x64 and another on x32. I assure you that no one would install the x32 one.
Greetings.

 

[Xeno1234]

Kaspersky has another problem and it is also serious for me. It is the only AV that does not have a 64-bit version, regardless of whether its internal sub processes are x64. Why don't they do what Eset did before. Have an install on x64 and another on x32. I assure you that no one would install the x32 one.
Greetings.

What issue does that give? Im curious

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

What issue does that give? Im curious

The problem is that if you use 32 bits, the AV is using half the power of your processor. At least the interface and some modules.

 

[harlan4096]

Only the GUI is in x86...

 

[Jonny Quest]

The problem is that if you use 32 bits, the AV is using half the power of your processor. At least the interface and some modules.

But it doesn't affect the protection. I had not thought about it being 32 bit, until you mentioned it (i.e. Kaspersky processes showing 32 bit)

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

Only the GUI is in x86...

not only the GUI, since the antivirus is installed in the program files folder (x86) and not in the 64-bit program files folder.

 

[Xeno1234]

The problem is that if you use 32 bits, the AV is using half the power of your processor. At least the interface and some modules.

Wouldnt that be not bad though? It uses less resources?

 

[ForgottenSeer 97327]

I appreciate your input, but I still want to respond...

I don't manipulate my videos or samples. I spend a lot of time searching for links and malware samples (execution, analysis, etc.) to determine whether they are false positives or not, especially to see if the sample really has active payload. In the beginning, I wasn't always careful because I took less time to analyze them, but now I invest a lot of time in handling all of this.

It's true that I'm not a professional, and I never will be. I don't want that, and I don't want it to take over my personal life or (hopefully soon) my professional life. Making videos is a hobby that I really enjoy sharing with you all.

Unfortunately, I have my reasons for not giving any credit to AV-Comparatives, and they're not the only ones—AV-Tests as well. The only one I often trust and follow is @Adrian Ścibor (I appreciate what he does, and I've said that before), but I'm the type to test things myself

Off course not, but your reasons are personal opinions, again

Be a sport, I applaude your tests, I like to watch them and I really value you making them, but your test don't improve in quality nor credibility when bashing AV-C.

 

[harlan4096]

not only the GUI, since the antivirus is installed in the program files folder (x86) and not in the 64-bit program files folder.

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

View attachment 278618

It has sub processes in 64 bits, but what is loaded into RAM is in x32 and that bothers me. I would like a future version that works entirely on x64. Greetings

 

[brambedkar59]

not only the GUI, since the antivirus is installed in the program files folder (x86) and not in the 64-bit program files folder.

Found this in WayBackMachine as Kaspersky forum link (from 2021) seems to redirect to homepage for some reason.

32 bit application on 64 bit system?? | Kaspersky Community

Why kaspersky is installed as 32 bit app in 64 bit OS?? Kaspersy must identify which system is installed 32 or 64 and then install kaspersky 32 or 64 bit depends on OS.

web.archive.org

Edit: Nvm here's the link.

32 bit application on 64 bit system?? [Closed]

Why kaspersky is installed as 32 bit app in 64 bit OS?? Kaspersy must identify which system is installed 32 or 64 and then install kaspersky 32 or 64 bit depends on OS.

forum.kaspersky.com

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

View attachment 278619
Found this in WayBackMachine as Kaspersky forum link (from 2021) seems to redirect to homepage for some reason.

32 bit application on 64 bit system?? | Kaspersky Community

Why kaspersky is installed as 32 bit app in 64 bit OS?? Kaspersy must identify which system is installed 32 or 64 and then install kaspersky 32 or 64 bit depends on OS.

web.archive.org

Edit: Nvm here's the link.

32 bit application on 64 bit system?? [Closed]

Why kaspersky is installed as 32 bit app in 64 bit OS?? Kaspersy must identify which system is installed 32 or 64 and then install kaspersky 32 or 64 bit depends on OS.

forum.kaspersky.com

He is not the only person who thinks the same as me. An x64 installer. According to Kaspersky it doesn't make sense, according to the other antiviruses? all other avs work installed on x64. Regardless of whether the protection works on x64.

 

[B-boy/StyLe/]

I don't believe that x64 is not planned, since Win11 and up will be only x64. Also, they said before in their forum that Kaspersky will not use .Net 6 when they were on Net 5, but they migrated to Net 6 for the new versions anyway. But I guess the time will show.

 

[SpyNetGirl]

AV-Comparatives... Do I need to remind you why you should never trust it?

Exactly! this ^
They are all for marketing purposes, nothing else.

What I'm saying is for your own benefits people. You don't need to pay money for any AV. Everything you need and even better features, are already in the Windows. All you need to do is to activate them, for FREE.

GitHub - HotCakeX/Harden-Windows-Security: Harden Windows Safely, Securely using Official Supported Microsoft methods and proper explanation | Always up-to-date and works with the latest build of Windows | Provides tools and Guides for Personal, Ente

Harden Windows Safely, Securely using Official Supported Microsoft methods and proper explanation | Always up-to-date and works with the latest build of Windows | Provides tools and Guides for Pers...

github.com

You think I'm wrong? No problem. Show proof that Microsoft Defender, after using the hardening module, didn't catch something.

 

[cruelsister]

The quality of a Professional test Result is directly proportional to the quality of the samples used. Unless proper diversity in type and mechanism are used everyone tends to get a medal.

The old Rule of Coding applies to these tests- garbage in, garbage out.

 

[Lymphocyte]

I just bought bitdefender total security for 3 years

Good choice although I believe that for most users, Bitdefender Antivirus Plus is enough.

Users want a product with no bloatware like Emsisoft Anti Malware, VIPRE, and F-Secure (vpn bloatware, but less bloatware than Bitdefender).

An important number of security companies such as the ones you mentioned, plus G-Data or ESET still offer a just antivirus edition of their product.