- May 11, 2024
- 64
In terms of protecting against unknown threats, IMO behaviour protection is more important than heuristic. So only consider this aspect, how are these working?
Last edited:
For a home user, as in the Compare list shown above?Xcitium VirusScope(Static and Dynamic Behaviour Analysis with machine learning)
then Comodo VirusScope(Static and Dynamic Behaviour Analysis with machine learning)For a home user, as in the Compare list shown above?
Thanks. I indeed tested some of those. Avast, Kaspersky and F-Secure, with a small amount of samples, double-click if they are not instantly killed by file protection. But their performance is kinda hard to compare, at least for my small tests. For some samples, Kaspersky did well and for other samples avast did well.Out of those list, I'm only familiar with Kaspersky so I say System Watcher. But why not try them all out and see what works best on your system
Thank you for the reply.then Comodo VirusScope(Static and Dynamic Behaviour Analysis with machine learning)
Comodo's detection technologies have always been average at best. Whitelisting and containment are Comodo's major strengths. If you prioritize prevention over detection, Comodo is worth considering because of its default-deny approach.But I tried Comodo 2025 frankly speaking, with default setting, which is closer to common home users. 1st VM I installed its firewall component with F-Secure. So it does have HIPS and VirusScope. But for the new samples I tried to execute, only containment, firewall and HIPS are triggered, didn’t see VirusScope pop up. And even HIPS not quite much F-Secure’s Deep Guard is triggered several times. The 2nd VM is purely CIS 2025. Out of 40 samples the VirusScope is triggered only 4 times, scan detects only 1. So it's 5/40 in total. Compared to Kaspersky with File Protection turned off and without internet, Kaspersky intercepts and kills more than half of the samples., while with internet, more than 30. Although I must say Comodo's containment/sandbox is another viable way for unknown threats surely, with years of history.
Comodo VirusScope is really good Shadowra tested it and also i test it everyday its really goodThank you for the reply.
But I tried Comodo 2025 frankly speaking, with default setting, which is closer to common home users. 1st VM I installed its firewall component with F-Secure. So it does have HIPS and VirusScope. But for the new samples I tried to execute, only containment, firewall and HIPS are triggered, didn’t see VirusScope pop up. And even HIPS not quite much F-Secure’s Deep Guard is triggered several times. The 2nd VM is purely CIS 2025. Out of 40 samples the VirusScope is triggered only 4 times, scan detects only 1. So it's 5/40 in total. Compared to Kaspersky with File Protection turned off and without internet, Kaspersky intercepts and kills more than half of the samples., while with internet, more than 30. Although I must say Comodo's containment/sandbox is another viable way for unknown threats surely, with years of history.
Also Xcitium/Comodo has a cloud based file analysis system that has Static and Dynamic Analysis Cloud Verdict Customer Login | Xcitium Cloud VerdictThank you for the reply.
But I tried Comodo 2025 frankly speaking, with default setting, which is closer to common home users. 1st VM I installed its firewall component with F-Secure. So it does have HIPS and VirusScope. But for the new samples I tried to execute, only containment, firewall and HIPS are triggered, didn’t see VirusScope pop up. And even HIPS not quite much F-Secure’s Deep Guard is triggered several times. The 2nd VM is purely CIS 2025. Out of 40 samples the VirusScope is triggered only 4 times, scan detects only 1. So it's 5/40 in total. Compared to Kaspersky with File Protection turned off and without internet, Kaspersky intercepts and kills more than half of the samples., while with internet, more than 30. Although I must say Comodo's containment/sandbox is another viable way for unknown threats surely, with years of history.