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
Inactive Support Threads
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
Software
Security Apps
Other security for Windows, Mac, Linux
Best Second opinion scanners
Message
<blockquote data-quote="cruelsister" data-source="post: 985831" data-attributes="member: 7463"><p>As Scripts have been mentioned above I thought it would be nice to get an idea of the relative efficacy of these (from the poll) scanners versus some old wormy standards. In order to do so I infected a Windows 11 x64 system with 7 worms, one of which will spawn a malicious executable, whereas the others just hang out in Local or Roaming with simple registry startup entries to propagate themselves on reboot.</p><p></p><p>So the point of this (very, very simple) 2nd opinion scanner test would be to determine if any detections are made on initial scan, then analyze the system on reboot to see if any worms are still extent, followed by a 2nd scan, reboot, then final manual analysis.</p><p></p><p>Results- of these scanners, all detected and eradicated the malicious exe file. All but HMP/Sophos Scan&Clean (yes, I actually tested both) found some of the persistence entries.</p><p></p><p>So, out of 7 infections:</p><p></p><p>1). HMP/Sophos): 1/7</p><p>2). MB- 2/7</p><p>3). ESET- 1/7</p><p>4). EEK- 3/7</p><p>5). NPE- 7/7</p><p>6). KVRT- 7/7</p><p></p><p>For the persistence registry entries, only NPE (1 detection and deletion) and KVRT had any effect on these. KVRT actually detected and deleted all, so was the only one that left the system pristine.</p><p></p><p>Note that using other Scriptors with different mechanisms would no doubt give somewhat different results, but I am hoping that one will get a feel for how these guys work.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cruelsister, post: 985831, member: 7463"] As Scripts have been mentioned above I thought it would be nice to get an idea of the relative efficacy of these (from the poll) scanners versus some old wormy standards. In order to do so I infected a Windows 11 x64 system with 7 worms, one of which will spawn a malicious executable, whereas the others just hang out in Local or Roaming with simple registry startup entries to propagate themselves on reboot. So the point of this (very, very simple) 2nd opinion scanner test would be to determine if any detections are made on initial scan, then analyze the system on reboot to see if any worms are still extent, followed by a 2nd scan, reboot, then final manual analysis. Results- of these scanners, all detected and eradicated the malicious exe file. All but HMP/Sophos Scan&Clean (yes, I actually tested both) found some of the persistence entries. So, out of 7 infections: 1). HMP/Sophos): 1/7 2). MB- 2/7 3). ESET- 1/7 4). EEK- 3/7 5). NPE- 7/7 6). KVRT- 7/7 For the persistence registry entries, only NPE (1 detection and deletion) and KVRT had any effect on these. KVRT actually detected and deleted all, so was the only one that left the system pristine. Note that using other Scriptors with different mechanisms would no doubt give somewhat different results, but I am hoping that one will get a feel for how these guys work. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top