App Review Comparative Antivirus : Norton vs McAfee vs Trend Micro

[Shadowra]

Content source

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZUM4WnjhjI

Hello and welcome to this comparative!
We meet again for the fight made in Shadowra (and not of the WWE xD ) between Norton, McAfee and Trend Micro !
Antivirus companies will fight to know who will be the first one!
Let's go !



Interface:

Norton offers a very familiar and complete interface.
McAfee joins Norton, but the interface seems a bit heavy
Trend will interest the novices.

Phishing Link:

Norton detects 3 out of 5 phishing, 2 are not blocked
McAfee blocks 4 out of 5 phishing
Trend Micro misses only 1, but 2 URLs are dead.

Malware Link:

All 3 antivirus programs detect all malicious URLs.

Fake crack:

All 3 antivirus programs correctly detect fake crack

Malware Pack :

Norton leaves 107, it blocks all the files executed and makes the machine safe.
McAfee has... It is more dangerous. It leaves 61, leaves a fake casino and the worm Worm.Sivis.
The machine is well infected!
Trend does the same as Norton, it leaves 93 and also makes the machine healthy.

Scan tool :

Norton and Trend Micro make a machine healthy. No malware is detected by the tools.
McAfee left him the Sivis worm, detected in a file of Emsisoft by Hitman Pro.
I decide to pass Kaspersky Virus Removal Tool to complementary purposes which detected 319 infected files!

Rating:

1st : Norton Security
1st Ex-Aequo : Trend Micro
3rd : McAfee

 

[ForgottenSeer 67480]

Real McAfee name for letting Worm.Sivis infect someone's PC? McMoron.

 

[Zartarra]

Strange that Norton blocks so many samples.

I am currently testing Norton Security and Trend Micro IS. Norton is at the moment a big fail. Blocks only a handful of samples and Sonar is not that great.

I am impressed with the improvements of Trend Micro. Signatures seems to be better and they block a lots more samples on execution than last year. Currently they are the only one that blocks the 35 ransomware samples. from the tested products (ESET: 7/35 - Avast: 17/35 - Hitman Pro: 21/35).

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

Strange that Norton blocks so many samples.

I am currently testing Norton Security and Trend Micro IS. Norton is at the moment a big fail. Blocks only a handful of samples and Sonar is not that great.

I am impressed with the improvements of Trend Micro. Signatures seems to be better and they block a lots more samples on execution than last year. Currently they are the only one that blocks the 35 ransomware samples. from the tested products (ESET: 7/35 - Avast: 17/35 - Hitman Pro: 21/35).

so bad is Norton are you sure? And how did Kaspersky do? if you could test it.
Thanks

 

[Shadowra]

Strange that Norton blocks so many samples.

I am currently testing Norton Security and Trend Micro IS. Norton is at the moment a big fail. Blocks only a handful of samples and Sonar is not that great.

I am impressed with the improvements of Trend Micro. Signatures seems to be better and they block a lots more samples on execution than last year. Currently they are the only one that blocks the 35 ransomware samples. from the tested products (ESET: 7/35 - Avast: 17/35 - Hitman Pro: 21/35).

Put the SONAR on aggressive and redo your test.
Which I do all the time.

On the other hand Norton not so great ? With their DB and Download Insight, it's one of the few to give me a clean VM oO

 

[Zartarra]

Put the SONAR on aggressive and redo your test.
Which I do all the time.

On the other hand Norton not so great ? With their DB and Download Insight, it's one of the few to give me a clean VM oO

Sonar was on aggressive mode. I tested a bit further and the results are the same. Strange. If I have the time, I am going to reinstall it and test with other samples to see what the results are.

 

[SeriousHoax]

Nice test. But IMO, you should always test an AV on default settings because that's how most users use their AV. Changing settings to increase protection level, heuristics level is not an ideal test or comparison and gives an unfair result. Many products don't even have any way to increase protection level. For example, McAfee in this test.
Of course, you can test by modifying settings, but that should be a separate part of the video/a separate video/the title of the video should mention that settings were modified.
For example, if a test is done here on the malware hub, then it's stated on the title of the product how the product was tested. Whether it was on default or modified settings. So everyone is instantly aware how the product was tested.

 

[BigWrench]

Nice test. But IMO, you should always test an AV on default settings because that's how most users use their AV. Changing settings to increase protection level, heuristics level is not an ideal test or comparison and gives an unfair result. Many products don't even have any way to increase protection level. For example, McAfee in this test.
Of course, you can test by modifying settings, but that should be a separate part of the video/a separate video/the title of the video should mention that settings were modified.
For example, if a test is done here on the malware hub, then it's stated on the title of the product how the product was tested. Whether it was on default or modified settings. So everyone is instantly aware how the product was tested.

Amen