App Review Bitdefender Total Security 2019 Review | Tested vs Malware

[MoriartyOW]

Content source

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKMzo68mctQ

 

[RoboMan]

"BitDefender tells me I'm infected and I should reboot the system! Nah, I won't do that." okay that's it for me video closed

 

[MoriartyOW]

"BitDefender tells me I'm infected and I should reboot the system! Nah, I won't do that." okay that's it for me video closed

Hi
you can Continue watching from 4:45. he scanned the folder again and there was no problem with 2 other malwares that time.

 

[RoboMan]

Hi
you can Continue watching from 4:45. he scanned the folder again and there was no problem with 2 other malwares that time.

Thanks. Anyways, the fact that a security product gives you such an important recommendation and you avoid it, makes the whole testing beyond that useless. There's a reason why BitDefender needs to restart. By not doing so, you're potentially harming the results that origin from that point onwards. It's not accurate. Plus, throwing plenty of samples at the same time on the dynamic scan: what?

 

[illumination]

Hi
you can Continue watching from 4:45. he scanned the folder again and there was no problem with 2 other malwares that time.

Shall we discuss this video? First, 700 some odd pieces of malware, i'm sure those are very fresh, as it is so easy to find that many fresh samples, oh wait, see that they are renamed, another pack of mostly detected, and he claims 1 to 7 days old.... There is no way they are that fresh and it detected that many.... Then as stated the product notified him to restart for an infection which in real world scenario, you would stop what you are doing and restart the system. Now something else to ponder, he had to do what to introduce the folder of samples to the system, oh yeah, disable realtime protection, because everyone does this before downloading to their system right

 

[Deleted Member 3a5v73x]

Then as stated the product notified him to restart for an infection which in real world scenario, you would stop what you are doing and restart the system. Now something else to ponder, he had to do what to introduce the folder of samples to the system, oh yeah, disable realtime protection, because everyone does this before downloading to their system right

Anyways, the fact that a security product gives you such an important recommendation and you avoid it, makes the whole testing beyond that useless. There's a reason why BitDefender needs to restart. By not doing so, you're potentially harming the results that origin from that point onwards. It's not accurate. Plus, throwing plenty of samples at the same time on the dynamic scan: what?

I am at point to make additional MT accounts just to give more likes.

 

[MoriartyOW]

Shall we discuss this video? First, 700 some odd pieces of malware, i'm sure those are very fresh, as it is so easy to find that many fresh samples, oh wait, see that they are renamed, another pack of mostly detected, and he claims 1 to 7 days old.... There is no way they are that fresh and it detected that many.... Then as stated the product notified him to restart for an infection which in real world scenario, you would stop what you are doing and restart the system. Now something else to ponder, he had to do what to introduce the folder of samples to the system, oh yeah, disable realtime protection, because everyone does this before downloading to their system right

they are youtubers dude what did you expect ...

 

[illumination]

they are youtubers dude what did you expect ...

The point to our comments is that the test is completely misleading/erroneous.

 

[RoboMan]

I hate the fact that Leo makes such disinforming tests, and people praise him and comment his videos with "awsome test", "nice results!", or the best one, my favourite... "BitDefender is really good, I'm installing it!"...no no no please no NOOOOOOOOOOO, don't base on these tests to use a product, don't. In order for a test to be as accurate as possible, still not close to a real-life scenario:

• Each sample should be test at a time
• VM sessions should be rebooted and rollbacked to snapshot after each sample*
• No component should be uninstalled/disabled
• For godsake don't exclude the malware in order to test dynamic protection (???)
• No warnings should be avoided
• Don't lie about the samples age (dude you're trying to inform)

*really necessary for accurate testing but understandeable if cannot do, too much time-consuming.

If you can't find a test including most of these, it's probably garbage. No structure is followed, no procedure. This is not informative. Beyond that, it's the opposite. Don't contribute to spread this crap.

Love and cheers. (hehe)

 

[illumination]

I hate the fact that Leo makes such disinforming tests, and people praise him and comment his videos with "awsome test", "nice results!", or the best one, my favourite... "BitDefender is really good, I'm installing it!"...no no no please no NOOOOOOOOOOO, don't base on these tests to use a product, don't. In order for a test to be as accurate as possible, still not close to a real-life scenario:

• Each sample should be test at a time
• VM sessions should be rebooted and rollbacked to snapshot after each sample*
• No component should be uninstalled/disabled
• For godsake don't exclude the malware in order to test dynamic protection (???)
• No warnings should be avoided
• Don't lie about the samples age (dude you're trying to inform)

*really necessary for accurate testing but understandeable if cannot do, too much time-consuming.

If you can't find a test including most of these, it's probably garbage. No structure is followed, no procedure. This is not informative. Beyond that, it's the opposite. Don't contribute to spread this crap.

Love and cheers. (hehe)

 

[MoriartyOW]

I hate the fact that Leo makes such disinforming tests, and people praise him and comment his videos with "awsome test", "nice results!", or the best one, my favourite... "BitDefender is really good, I'm installing it!"...no no no please no NOOOOOOOOOOO, don't base on these tests to use a product, don't. In order for a test to be as accurate as possible, still not close to a real-life scenario:

• Each sample should be test at a time
• VM sessions should be rebooted and rollbacked to snapshot after each sample*
• No component should be uninstalled/disabled
• For godsake don't exclude the malware in order to test dynamic protection (???)
• No warnings should be avoided
• Don't lie about the samples age (dude you're trying to inform)

*really necessary for accurate testing but understandeable if cannot do, too much time-consuming.

If you can't find a test including most of these, it's probably garbage. No structure is followed, no procedure. This is not informative. Beyond that, it's the opposite. Don't contribute to spread this crap.

Love and cheers. (hehe)

the only trustable test i know is malware hub tests.

 

[Mahesh Sudula]

various "professional" testings sites such as AV-Test and the Malware Hub can indeed give an approximate idea of how good is a product.[/QUOTE]
It is not professional testing..its all money based. THEY ARE PAID FOR THOSE RESULTS
Static tests never ever reflect real world attacks

 

[ncage]

I actually liked his testing. Not saying his tests are perfect because they are not. A couple minor quibbles with his test is that hey never goes over resource usage. No one wants a heavy AV that slows the system down. Unfortunately bitdefender i would say is quite heavy (usually using ~150-200mb of memory and i've seen it use north of 400mb when its doing some heavy scanning). It can also be quite slow to startup after bootup telling you that is waiting for services to start (and yes this is on a machine with a SSD). He also didn't test the behavior blocker which is one of my main areas of interest.

I've been running bitdefender since 2017 and i wouldn't say its the buggiest piece of software i've run like a lot of others would be it definitely has its share of bugs but i wouldn't say its any worse (actually its probably better) than norton but its not nearly as solid as emsisoft (which is my favorite).

 

[Mahesh Sudula]

Bit defender BB is already known as one of the best in industry> BB never give Fp's
Against Norton..i would pick Norton since > It is the only AV that use Live heuristics to catch a phished host / > Their heuristics also work proactively before SONAR acts though its CLOUD is overactive
Both Norton and Bit defender easily beat Emsisoft in all the areas..since all of their components are much more solid, matured and auto mode

 

[RoboMan]

I would risk my hands in combat that Norton's SONAR and BitDefender's Active Threat Control are probably the two best 1-st generation behaviour blockers in the market, if well configured. Very agressive and sensitive. Maybe the problem in their solutions is how they connect the BB to the rest of the modules, or the inefficiency of the rest of the modules.

 

[MoriartyOW]

I would risk my hands in combat that Norton's SONAR and BitDefender's Active Threat Control are probably the two best 1-st generation behaviour blockers in the market, if well configured. Very agressive and sensitive. Maybe the problem in their solutions is how they connect the BB to the rest of the modules, or the inefficiency of the rest of the modules.

which av has the best BB in your opinion ?

 

[RoboMan]

which av has the best BB in your opinion ?

Like I said, I think is strictly depends. If an antivirus relied only upon its BB and nothing else, then I would probably grab BitDefender and go from here to my tomb. Proactive, sensitive, intelligent, smart. But as we know, a behaviour blocker is not enough and is not the only security layer on a product. So, starting from this premise, and in a real-life scenario, I would pick any Kaspersky's suite because its behaviour blocker is smart enough as to complement in a distinctive way with all the other modules such as System Watcher, Application Control, Network Blocker. All in all, creates a top-notch all-in-one solutions that locks your system if well configured. That's why in a real-life scenario, I would pick Kaspersky's BB.