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
Security
Security Statistics and Reports
Business Test Factsheet August-September 2020
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Andy Ful" data-source="post: 909343" data-attributes="member: 32260"><p>The below group of AVs (0-3 missed samples) could have the same protection in the wild in August-September 2020 Real-World part of this test (despite different scoring): <strong>Avast, Bitdefender, Elastic, Eset, Fortinet, G-Data, K7, Kaspersky, Microsoft, Panda. </strong>Such spread of results is a natural statistical effect when one chooses 411 samples from tenths of thousands of different malware variants in the wild.</p><p></p><p>The <strong>SparkCognition</strong> result is slightly lower than expected by pure statistical reasoning.</p><p></p><p>The results of Acronis, Cisco, CrowdStrike, Cybereason, FireEye, Sophos, and Vmware are hard to explain by pure statistics - it is very probable that their protection in the wild could be lower as compared to the first group.</p><p></p><p>Edit.</p><p>Most AVs were set with no-default settings. For example, Microsoft Defender settings were as follows: Cloud protection level set to “High”, Cloud-delivered protection set to “Advanced”. Google Chrome extension “Windows Defender Browser Protection” installed and enabled.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Andy Ful, post: 909343, member: 32260"] The below group of AVs (0-3 missed samples) could have the same protection in the wild in August-September 2020 Real-World part of this test (despite different scoring): [B]Avast, Bitdefender, Elastic, Eset, Fortinet, G-Data, K7, Kaspersky, Microsoft, Panda. [/B]Such spread of results is a natural statistical effect when one chooses 411 samples from tenths of thousands of different malware variants in the wild. The [B]SparkCognition[/B] result is slightly lower than expected by pure statistical reasoning. The results of Acronis, Cisco, CrowdStrike, Cybereason, FireEye, Sophos, and Vmware are hard to explain by pure statistics - it is very probable that their protection in the wild could be lower as compared to the first group. Edit. Most AVs were set with no-default settings. For example, Microsoft Defender settings were as follows: Cloud protection level set to “High”, Cloud-delivered protection set to “Advanced”. Google Chrome extension “Windows Defender Browser Protection” installed and enabled. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top