Serious Discussion DEBATE | Are security YouTubers misleading people about antivirus effectiveness?

I think @RoboMan raises a fair point because as @piquiteco their testing method is totally unrealistic. I once beta tested PrevX. At that time it was easier to get and find malware. Prevx blocked everything I threw on it using the real world scenario when the context slider was set to (high) prevalence and age from reputable sources.. When PrevX was launched it did ridicule awful in youtube tests and became the laugh on enthusiastic amateur security forums like WS and MT.

I got a lifetime license (ended when Webroot took over) and PrevX served for many years as a light and problem free protection on my wife's laptop.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Hundred Points
Reactions: piquiteco, Sorrento, simmerskool and 4 others
LinuxFan58 said:
I think @RoboMan raises a fair point because as @piquiteco their testing method is totally unrealistic. I once beta tested PrevX. At that time it was easier to get and find malware. Prevx blocked everything I threw on it using the real world scenario when the context slider was set to (high) prevalence and age from reputable sources.. When PrevX was launched it did ridicule awful in youtube tests and became the laugh on enthusiastic amateur security forums like WS and MT.

I got a lifetime license (ended when Webroot took over) and PrevX served for many years as a light and problem free protection on my wife's laptop.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I used Prevx + EQSecure too.
I knew a IT-Security from my country who worked at that company (Eraser), but then his startup was acquired by Malwarebytes and I lost touch with him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LinuxFan58, piquiteco, Sorrento and 3 others
Shadowra said:
Most YouTube testers will bombard the system. Some will even use scripts (like Malx) to overload the protection and the system.
That’s why the residential engine will struggle to neutralize everything
Click to expand...
What I call the machine gun approach.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
  • +Reputation
Reactions: Khushal, simmerskool, Sorrento and 4 others
The problem with YouTube tech influencer's isn't the tests, it's the fact you don't know if they are being paid or sponsored which many are in fact being paid for opinions.

I have no trouble with people making money from social media content but any sponsorship or advertising or commercial relationship must be clearly outlined by the author.

I guess we are all oldskool kids from the early 2000's using forums, I find this format better than others but don't resent or object to new formats.
 
  • Like
  • Applause
Reactions: Khushal, simmerskool, Sorrento and 2 others
Trident said:
But then I have another question, why is the solution not terminating the script/executable (whatever causes the malware to be executed), unless it is previously excluded by the YouTuber…?

Because I can tell you from experience that developing a malware pack heuristic is not exceptionally hard to do.

The correct response is, you have seen that this process launches high number of samples and all of them, if not malicious/suspicious are unknown, mostly unsigned, all of them highly questionable.

At that point it becomes evident this is not a trusted process. What stops these billion-dollar companies from processing the threat correctly, by terminating what caused the execution in the first place. And deep scanning the entire malware pack.

I don’t think that consumers should be charged prices as high as $150-200 nowadays for bells and whistles, and brittle protections that rely on loads of ifs and but-s.
Click to expand...
I remember that one day TPCSC tested Bit defender and Bitsefender terminated his script, Malix
 
Khushal said:
I use them in my tests. I also use VT Enterprise threat intel to get the latest malware samples uploaded ton VT. Unfortunately F-Secure doesn't make the cut.
Click to expand...
Tests will be uploaded very very soon I promise as they need to be edited. Noone is going to watch 3+ hours footage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rashmi

You may also like...