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
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
Bitdefender IS vs Malwarebytes with latest samples.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ForgottenSeer 107474" data-source="post: 1082663"><p>What is also important is to add a conclusion at the end. Many VT don't (forcing people to watch to whole boring video). Cruel sister always adds a script in the beginning (what was tested). Your video's sort of always follow the same procedure, so after having watched many of your video's I know by now.</p><p></p><p>May I be so cheeky to suggest a change? You video's are of a better quality than all other YT I have seen, but you are still following the same procedure those Youtube Testers do. To set yourself apart from them, you should consider a change of testing procedure. May I suggest a small adoption and a major addition?</p><p></p><p>The procedure most Youtube testers follow is</p><p>- a manual 1-by-1 URL block test</p><p>- a scan on a folder with malware (a 'malware ZOO')</p><p>- a scripted gangbang on the remainder of that folder (not removed by the scan)</p><p>- run some second opinion scanners to check what is left/missed</p><p>- release the video</p><p></p><p><span style="color: rgb(65, 168, 95)"><strong>Small adoption</strong></span>: What I would like to know is how the missed downloaded samples would be handled by the tested product</p><p>- a manual 1-by-1 URL block test</p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(65, 168, 95)">- add the <em>downloaded samples of the missed URL blocks to the folder of your malware collection</em></span></em></p><p>- a scan on a folder with malware</p><p>- a scripted gangbang on the remainder of that folder (missed by URL block and scan)</p><p>- run some second opinion scanners to check what is left/missed</p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(65, 168, 95)">- add a Cruel Sister recap with found traces and infections (of the above scans) plus active processes with a VT-score (using process explorer) of +1 (possible FP) and +5 (malware)</span></em></p><p>- release the video (luckily you fast forward and edit your video's <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite130" alt="(y)" title="Thumbs up (y)" loading="lazy" data-shortname="(y)" /> )</p><p></p><p><strong><span style="color: rgb(184, 49, 47)">Major addition: </span></strong>I know one professional testing agency also checks what samples are recognized a day later</p><p>- <span style="color: rgb(184, 49, 47)"><em>wait a day and bring virtual box back to the 'after the URL test' state</em></span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(184, 49, 47)"><em>- a text intro (like Cruel Sister always does) summarizing the results of previous test </em></span></p><p>- a scripted gangbang on the remainder of that folder (missed by URL block and scan)</p><p>- run some second opinion scanners to check what is left/missed</p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(184, 49, 47)">- a text conclusion/summary (like Cruel Sister always does) on the differences in results between 0-day and 1-day</span></em></p><p>- release the follow up video</p><p></p><p>This way you could re-use some of your hard work and double your content production (and hopefuly traffic also).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ForgottenSeer 107474, post: 1082663"] What is also important is to add a conclusion at the end. Many VT don't (forcing people to watch to whole boring video). Cruel sister always adds a script in the beginning (what was tested). Your video's sort of always follow the same procedure, so after having watched many of your video's I know by now. May I be so cheeky to suggest a change? You video's are of a better quality than all other YT I have seen, but you are still following the same procedure those Youtube Testers do. To set yourself apart from them, you should consider a change of testing procedure. May I suggest a small adoption and a major addition? The procedure most Youtube testers follow is - a manual 1-by-1 URL block test - a scan on a folder with malware (a 'malware ZOO') - a scripted gangbang on the remainder of that folder (not removed by the scan) - run some second opinion scanners to check what is left/missed - release the video [COLOR=rgb(65, 168, 95)][B]Small adoption[/B][/COLOR]: What I would like to know is how the missed downloaded samples would be handled by the tested product - a manual 1-by-1 URL block test [I][COLOR=rgb(65, 168, 95)]- add the [I]downloaded samples of the missed URL blocks to the folder of your malware collection[/I][/COLOR][/I] - a scan on a folder with malware - a scripted gangbang on the remainder of that folder (missed by URL block and scan) - run some second opinion scanners to check what is left/missed [I][COLOR=rgb(65, 168, 95)]- add a Cruel Sister recap with found traces and infections (of the above scans) plus active processes with a VT-score (using process explorer) of +1 (possible FP) and +5 (malware)[/COLOR][/I] - release the video (luckily you fast forward and edit your video's (y) ) [B][COLOR=rgb(184, 49, 47)]Major addition: [/COLOR][/B]I know one professional testing agency also checks what samples are recognized a day later - [COLOR=rgb(184, 49, 47)][I]wait a day and bring virtual box back to the 'after the URL test' state - a text intro (like Cruel Sister always does) summarizing the results of previous test [/I][/COLOR] - a scripted gangbang on the remainder of that folder (missed by URL block and scan) - run some second opinion scanners to check what is left/missed [I][COLOR=rgb(184, 49, 47)]- a text conclusion/summary (like Cruel Sister always does) on the differences in results between 0-day and 1-day[/COLOR][/I] - release the follow up video This way you could re-use some of your hard work and double your content production (and hopefuly traffic also). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top