God I hope they don't get bought out and repackaged into bloatware security products.
Cylance (old and new) vs. Signature-based AV (in an offline test) with fresh malware and ransomware
- Thread starter Mahesh Sudula
- Start date
It is advised to take all reviews with a grain of salt. In extreme cases some reviews use dramatization for entertainment purposes.
- Status
- Aug 17, 2017
- 1,508
Your critique of my post yesterday was mostly justified but you are speaking here as if you are speaking in a conversation post ? Maybe I should just ignore this but right now I don't think so.
- Apr 13, 2013
- 3,150
As I've said before, Artificial Intelligence does not mean the IQ is very high.
Good point. Especially since most vectors Cylance doesn't cover can be covered without ANY additional system weight or bloat.
I can write a login script(or you can use a canned one from someone else) for Windows to shut down the majority of open Cylance vectors like scripts and junk. Tweak up Windows Firewall, add a malware blocking DNS to your router DNS resolver entries, toss an extension on your browser and be done. No additional bloat, bloated suites, telemetry, ads, useless features, upsells, - all gone.
If you get infected under those conditions then consider Chromebooks or Debian instead.
Last edited by a moderator:
Cylance hasn't brought anything new to the table. Their purported "Next Gen" has been in use for over a decade by others. "Next Gen" is a marketing gimmick.
And the definition of insanity is trying to do the same thing over-and-over, but expecting a different result. I don't know about anyone else, but for me, after trying the same thing the 999th time and getting the same sort of same-old, same-old results, it just becomes plain, dumb, stupidity.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Nov 19, 2014
- 2,346
Not really as they also suck major d with scripts. On the other hand if you disallow scripts with policy then the ML does a pretty good job from my testing with exe. The cloud version also has 1% of settings of SEP which doesn't help setup some settings that improve the detection. SEP>SEPC=SEPSB
AI is marketing gimmick, but IQ can be measured. Best :emoji_ok_hand:
It's not Cylance that's causing controversy, but different understanding of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning terms used by security product vendors.
It's not Cylance that's causing controversy, but different understanding of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning terms used by security product vendors.
Last edited by a moderator:
It is, with their shitty "Unbelievable-my-crappy-butt" Tour where they cherry picked samples to look good and at the same time "cheated" the Sophos test by disabling some of its components, which retaliated perfectly and destroyed them in their own video (which was generously removed shortly after Cylance babycried and begged for its removal) LOOOOOL
Thoughts on comparative testing
itwt
Last edited by a moderator:
- May 16, 2018
- 1,363
Yeah, that's the reason I didn't like Cylance.... based on their cheater and then crybaby antics.
But things move on.... company leadership changes...
- Mar 17, 2016
- 457
Like I said, Cylance implicitly admitted that they caused confusion with their marketing in an article. I previously made the link to it, but obviously no one bothered to read it. If you don't like it, then take it up with Cylance. They're the ones who co-sponsored the Series 3 article.
There is no controversy. "Next Gen" is absolutely a marketing gimmick. It is used to make people think that they are getting some new cutting-edge technology, when, in truth, what they are getting is technology that has been around for over a decade and in-use by others. ESET and others within the industry agree with this position.
There is no controversy. "Next Gen" is absolutely a marketing gimmick. It is used to make people think that they are getting some new cutting-edge technology, when, in truth, what they are getting is technology that has been around for over a decade and in-use by others. ESET and others within the industry agree with this position.
Most of the time, the "Next Gen" technology is nothing new and has been around for an extremely long time... something old but re-branded as new. People do it all the time with cars, bikes, furniture... just with different wording appropriate for the topics. It's supposed to make the viewer believe they are going to get something brand new and phenomenally impressive to protect them from any type of attack... which draws in sales. Cylance aren't the only ones who have thrown around the "Next Gen" wording and other vendors who don't have dipped into other marketing tactics like using the AV testing results to claim they can provide "99% detection ratio", it's all just marketing in different forms.
It's a marketing gimmick. Lockdown is spot on.
Sounds like when some antivirus companies put the next year into their product name.
It's 2017, here's our new security X 2018.
Almost all AV's copy each other. After one comes to market with some new gimmick, most of the rest soon follow and jump on the same marketing band wagon. For example, if one piles on more features, then most of the others play catch-up and do the same. And continually adding features is not innovation. It is what the industry calls "feature creep." I know someone who insists that new features must continually be added to keep a product relevant. Nope. Not true. Adding more features means more user-annoying bugs and other problems. So less is always more - especially if a product works really well to begin with.
"Version Borg X-Gen Jedi Death Star Killer Stardate 2259.55" :X3:
- Apr 13, 2013
- 3,150
You talk from security geek perspective. Regular chrome/Adobe/office home user doesn't give a damn about AI or ML, just more confusing words to add for already existing - Antivirus. "Ye, cool story bro"
- Status
Similar threads
