AV-Comparatives test: Avast and AVG will protect 100% and no false positives

SumG

Level 2
Thread author
Verified
Apr 26, 2017
89
Screenshot_4.png


Avast and AVG offers the best free virus protection. This was confirmed last test independent testing bodies, AV-Comparatives.

One of the many reasons why Avast last year decided to buy the company AVG , our mutual trust that together we will be better and increase the quality of security, reliability and performance of our programs. The combination of CyberCapture from Avast and Behavioral shield from AVG allows us to provide superior online protection to more than 400 million users worldwide. The equipment of the 400 million users, in turn, act as a so-called. Sensors that provide us with large volumes of data that enable our experts in laboratory Avast Threat Labs to detect and defuse more malware than ever before, and it continuously and around the world.

What matters most, however, is how can our security software to compete, especially in the case of serious cyber-attacks. And as we saw with the recent massive attack Ransomware WannaCry - precisely because our technology is not only infected computer, which had installed the updated program Avast. Protecting users gives meaning to our work and the reason why we get up every day and go to work.

Independent testing welcome
AV-Comparatives, one of the most prestigious independent laboratories testing the wide range of online security for years and evaluate our products. The so-called. Test real protection (Real-World Protection Test) analyzes the behavior of security solutions and how they respond to real threats (phishing, malware, etc.) That simulate real online world today.

Because we believe that everyone has the right to safe access to the Internet, we put our products to the highest standards. I therefore regularly leave our free security product Avast Free Antivirus test. Even bad results, of which we were disappointed would be for us the information that we have to work on the product and improve it. Much more important than the result of the test is for us alone protect you, our users.

But happy to announce that our free security products Avast and AVG test resulted in the 21 analyzed solutions perfectly - stood at 100% and showed no false alarms.

Screenshot_1.png

Maximum protection and minimum impact on PC performance

The great news is that our products not only protects users to the maximum, but they also have minimal impact on PC performance. In comparison with the solutions Microsoft Windows Defender, which in the assessment of the impact on PC performance lost 36.7 points, products Avast and AVG only lost 7.5 points. For this and many other reasons, we strongly recommended to use only the default protection on your computer.

Screenshot_1.png


Protection for each device

Probably we not hide how we are to your products and teams who have to work hard and constantly improve, proud. Our commitment is to provide Internet users in complete safety and carelessness. Look for products and applications for devices Windows, Mac, Android and iOS have to try them and contact us. Although we believe AV-Comparatives immensely appreciate the most important testers you, our users come to us every day rely on.

Source: Test AV-Comparatives: Avast a AVG vás chrání na 100 % a bez falešných poplachů



 

brambedkar59

Level 29
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Apr 16, 2017
1,869
I don't care how AVC do their "performance test" but, I can't correlate them with my own experience. I mean McAfee in the no.2 spot and Defender in the last spot, also Panda is shown heavier than BD & Kaspersky. Cmon, that doesn't seem right.
 
5

509322

100% is a myth, constructed by AV test firms. Real numbers are on Shadowserver... Endless malware thrown at these AV's and see who wins. No stroking, tweaking, adjusting.. Just the honeypot. 100%? LOL.. Sure. Try 86% AT BEST, with most products falling in the 2%-70% range of protection.

Shadowserver Foundation - AV - VirusWeeklyStats

100 % is valid only for the samples used under the specific test conditions; modify any test variables and one cannot assume the same 100 % result under the new test conditions.
 
5

509322

100% is a myth, constructed by AV test firms. Real numbers are on Shadowserver... Endless malware thrown at these AV's and see who wins. No stroking, tweaking, adjusting.. Just the honeypot. 100%? LOL.. Sure. Try 86% AT BEST, with most products falling in the 2%-70% range of protection.

Shadowserver Foundation - AV - VirusWeeklyStats

Symantec detects only 2 % out of 2+ million samples. F-Secure only 6 % out of 2+ million. Please...

There are details which are not divulged on the Shadowserver Foundation pages. So a person who views them is apt to make uniformed decisions.
 
F

ForgottenSeer 58943

Symantec detects only 2 % out of 2+ million samples. F-Secure only 6 % out of 2+ million. Please...

There are details which are not divulged on the Shadowserver Foundation pages. So a person who views them is apt to make uniformed decisions.

That's F-Secure Linux. Symantec has garbage signatures and there are whispers they may drop signatures. I assume Shadowserver is just raw scanning and the numbers start to make sense when that is considered. Stronger sig products seem to score much higher on that list. But I agree - don't use that to make an uninformed decision.. Maybe just a piece of the puzzle in consideration.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mekelek

Level 28
Verified
Well-known
Feb 24, 2017
1,661
That's F-Secure Linux. Symantec has garbage signatures and there are whispers they may drop signatures. I assume Shadowserver is just raw scanning and the numbers start to make sense when that is considered. Stronger sig products seem to score much higher on that list.
Symantec is one of the first to detect stuff by sigs next to ESET, what are you on about.
installed K7 on my VM, detected 5 out of 10 samples by a manual scan. meanwhile KIS, ESET, Norton had over that number, and the samples aren't even fresh-fresh.
 
5

509322

That's F-Secure Linux. Symantec has garbage signatures and there are whispers they may drop signatures. I assume Shadowserver is just raw scanning and the numbers start to make sense when that is considered. Stronger sig products seem to score much higher on that list.

I was so interested in that page that I really paid attention, didn't I ? :oops:

I'm almost certain all the scan engines used are the command line versions with tweaks that are not used in the commercially available products.

Signatures suxx, but they won't go away anytime soon. Typical users cannot handle anything more than that on their own. Install..., then push button.
 

VeeekTor

Level 5
Verified
May 16, 2017
197
Just some logic OK?

Many say well the samples are old, or the samples are new...

Regardless, they are all being tested by the same samples. SO the results of the tests are significant..

I'm just picking two well know names by random, here = If Norton catches 60% with 20% impact and Avast catches 89% with 20% impact on the system, it matters not whether the samples / malware is old or new.

The percentages speak volumes regardless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWNu72 and shmu26

codswollip

Level 23
Content Creator
Well-known
Jan 29, 2017
1,201
One data point. One month.AND.... these are OLD results. Go here and check the June data. Not 100% (notable that A/V powerhouse Tencent scored 100%).

This article is nothing more than a self-serving ad for Avast/AVG. In the long run, it means nothing.
 

Solarquest

Moderator
Verified
Staff Member
Malware Hunter
Well-known
Jul 22, 2014
2,525
The truth is... We don't know the truth.
AV test companies get (hundred) thousands samples daily and only test AV against few hundreds, why?
One thing is sure, real detection is far from close to 100%, for sure for new samples -if not malware wouldn't be (such) a problem.
 
5

509322

The truth is... We don't know the truth.
AV test companies get (hundred) thousands samples daily and only test AV against few hundreds, why?
One thing is sure, real detection is far from close to 100%, for sure for new samples -if not malware wouldn't be (such) a problem.

This is for everybody and anybody that has doubts about security softs and isn't directed at you @Solarquest.

Absolute detection is less than 100 %, but how many experienced security soft users actually get seriously infected with one of the regularly tested security suites installed on their system ? Hmmm ?

That 100 % is exactly what it is - wanting something that Santa Claus is never - ever - going to give anyone. Ever !

@Jack, @Spawn, @BoraMurdar, @Exterminator -- when is the last time that you remember an active MT member complain that their system was smashed (exploited, ransomed, hacked with financial damages, identity theft, or similar) with internet security suite\AV\security soft XYZ installed ?

In years I can only recall one. A guy using ESET Smart Security scanned a PDF he downloaded. The scan engine said "no detection." So the guy opened it - even though he admitted he got it from a fishy site and was concerned about it. The PDF was actually ransomware. (I guess he had file extensions hidden in Windows Explorer...)

If anybody wants as close to certainty as is technologically possible, then lock down your system with a default-deny solution plus make some wise OS tweaks and layer with some other good softs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Atlas147

Level 30
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Jul 28, 2014
1,990
I don't care how AVC do their "performance test" but, I can't correlate them with my own experience. I mean McAfee in the no.2 spot and Defender in the last spot, also Panda is shown heavier than BD & Kaspersky. Cmon, that doesn't seem right.
I would think that windows defender would be one of the best if not the best because it's basically optimised for the windows OS.
 

About us

  • MalwareTips is a community-driven platform providing the latest information and resources on malware and cyber threats. Our team of experienced professionals and passionate volunteers work to keep the internet safe and secure. We provide accurate, up-to-date information and strive to build a strong and supportive community dedicated to cybersecurity.

User Menu

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook or Twitter to know first about the latest cybersecurity incidents and malware threats.

Top