Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Security Statistics and Reports
AV-Comparatives Real-World Protection Test Jul-Oct 2023
Message
<blockquote data-quote="simmerskool" data-source="post: 1065306" data-attributes="member: 61091"><p>"bad" seems very relative by missing 1.8% or 9 of 513 IIRC with 0 false positives, while ALL of AV that did better also had <u>very</u>-bad false positives. Seems like there could be / is a strong negative correlation between compromised vs false positives, but don't know if this is causation evidence <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite132" alt=":unsure:" title="Unsure :unsure:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":unsure:" /> Is that discussed by AV-C? I guess AV-C acknowledges some interaction as it does / can otherwise lower their AV rating depending on false positives. [USER=32260]@Andy Ful[/USER] any thoughts about this... <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite132" alt=":unsure:" title="Unsure :unsure:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":unsure:" /> </p><p>Meanwhile ESET has 100% at AVLabs.pl <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite133" alt=":whistle:" title="Whistling :whistle:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":whistle:" /> ...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="simmerskool, post: 1065306, member: 61091"] "bad" seems very relative by missing 1.8% or 9 of 513 IIRC with 0 false positives, while ALL of AV that did better also had [U]very[/U]-bad false positives. Seems like there could be / is a strong negative correlation between compromised vs false positives, but don't know if this is causation evidence :unsure: Is that discussed by AV-C? I guess AV-C acknowledges some interaction as it does / can otherwise lower their AV rating depending on false positives. [USER=32260]@Andy Ful[/USER] any thoughts about this... :unsure: Meanwhile ESET has 100% at AVLabs.pl :whistle: ... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top