Battle Emsisoft Anti-Malware or Norton Internet Security 2017

[skandaloes]

My EAM license expired in 1 month and now i'm looking for an alternative.
My isp offers me norton for free and now i am thinking about to renew my eam license or take the free norton license.

How do you see this, how strong is norton in comparison?

 

[Fritz]

Anti-Malware is quite different from a traditional antivirus, so a better comparison would be Emsisoft Anti-Malware vs. Malwarebytes Anti-Malware I am assuming?

Not really. Malware is basically anything, that's bad for your computer. That includes virii, PUPs and all the other good stuff. Hence, Emsisoft covers all of it and not just the virus department. The naming on Malwarebytes' part was apparently done because it sounded well in marketing terms, but it didn't consider established nomenclature.

 

[spaceoctopus]

There is something that we forget in that debate of whether behavioral, signature less and zero-day protection is better than the method that uses signature for protection. The basic principle is to protect the user. Each manufacturer has it's method, more or less effective but it comes back to the latter, which is protecting the user.

You use a product and the BB detects a Ransomware, it's fine. You use another product it blocks it with signature and another product blocks the links that prevents you from downloading the Ransomware, it's fine too.

You have to be realistic, most people would prefer that the signature detects the Ransomware and quarantines it, than taking a chance to execute it and see how effective the behavioral detection is. Especially if you have sensitive infos on your machine and we all know how dangerous Ransomwares are. Then if one method fails the other protecting modules tries to intercept it. Whether it is behavioral analysis and blocking or using signature they are all important.

Some have very good signatures a weaker BB,others have a very good BB and not the best signatures around and so on. It also depends on the user's preferences and tastes too. I know some users who prefer a 'talkative' product and want to know everything that happen on their machines while others prefer products that take all decisions automatically.

Independent testing should not be discarded. Of course they don't reflect exactly every user's attitude on the net and when using a Pc, but it gives you some info about how the different products behaves for you to take objective decisions.

Concerning the two products above, they are all excellent products. Those who prefer behavioral blocking and protection as an example would feel more at ease with Emsisoft. On the other side if you like the product to take most of the decisions, and use more cloud tech and big data, then Norton would be a more appropriate choice. Emsisoft has also a good quality/price ratio. Norton is a bit more expensive but that doesn't mean its less effective.

 

[212eta]

but when you test a sample that has no signature, you will feel like Alice in Wonderland if Sonar message pops up and blocks anything.

That's how 0-day Threats need to be treated.

so I am not sure why you are talking about this 0.1 % Compromised.

0.1% Compromised + 6.4% User-Dependent ranked Emsisoft one-but Last (=Penultimate)
in the Real-World Protection Test (February-June 2017).
AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Real World Protection Test Overview

As simple as that.

Now, if some have a problem to accept how AV-Comparatives ranked Emsisoft,
I am the wrong person to address these issues.

You need to come in contact with AV-Comparatives and convince them to change their Testing pattern.
But I haven't seen such a thing...

However, simply bashing AV-Comparatives because they just ranked Emsisoft quite low,
is just a sign of AV Fanboy-ism.

And I do Not get well with AV-Fanboys, as I do Not use any Real-Time (Resident) AV.

 

[Nightwalker]

That's how 0-day Threats need to be treated.

0.1% Compromised + 6.4% User-Dependent ranked Emsisoft one-but Last (=Penultimate)
in the Real-World Protection Test (February-June 2017).
AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Real World Protection Test Overview

As simple as that.

Now, if some have a problem to accept how AV-Comparatives ranked Emsisoft,
I am the wrong person to address these issues.

You need to come in contact with AV-Comparatives and convince them to change their Testing pattern.
But I haven't seen such a thing...

However, simply bashing AV-Comparatives because they just ranked Emsisoft quite low,
is just a sign of AV Fanboy-ism.

And I do Not get well with AV-Fanboys, as I do Not use any Real-Time (Resident) AV.

Please read my posts again, I never critized AV-Comparatives, what are you talking about?

Read your posts again too, this is what I was talking about:

The yellow bar means behavior blocker and it is pretty good, THE END.

About the fanboy part, all that I can say is that "Argumentum ad hominem" is a very poor substitute for logical reasoning.

 

[Fritz]

That's how 0-day Threats need to be treated.

If you really think 0-day Threads shouldn't be detected it sure explains your reasoning. I don't assume a misunderstanding since @mekelek worded it rather clearly.

Now, if some have a problem to accept how AV-Comparatives ranked Emsisoft,
I am the wrong person to address these issues.

You need to come in contact with AV-Comparatives and convince them to change their Testing pattern.
[…]
And I do Not get well with AV-Fanboys, as I do Not use any Real-Time (Resident) AV.

Au contraire. If you publically adopt third parties' statements you are likely to be confronted with relevant critique. Comes with the territory.
Now I could start some drama as to how one might be an AV-C fanboy but I'd rather not go there.

About the fanboy part, all that I can say is that "Argumentum ad hominem" is a very poor substitute for logical reasoning.

Amen.

 

[mekelek]

If you really think 0-day Threads shouldn't be detected it sure explains your reasoning. I don't assume a misunderstanding since @mekelek worded it rather clearly.


Au contraire. If you publically adopt third parties' statements you are likely to be confronted with relevant critique. Comes with the territory.
Now I could start some drama as to how one might be an AV-C fanboy but I'd rather not go there.


Amen.

he is all over the place, he says i'm saying Norton/Symantec is only about signatures and now he's saying that Sonar shouldn't react on malware...

 

[212eta]

The yellow bar means behavior blocker and it is pretty good

The yellow bar is also User-Dependent; something you deliberately ignore...

Since Emsisoft offers that great protection, then,
why it was ranked so low (i.e. one-but-LAST) by the respective AV-Comparatives Test?

Some Emsisoft Fanboys have also spread another Fallacy dealing with the "Low" System Impact.
AV-Comparatives Performance Test (May 2017)
https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/avc_per_201705_en.pdf

Emsisoft had the 4th worst score based on PC Mark 8 Home Benchmark.

now he's saying that Sonar shouldn't react on malware

Is it what you finally understood?
For one more time, SONAR deals with 0-day Real-Time Protection.

 

[mekelek]

The yellow bar is also User-Dependent; something you deliberately ignore...

Since Emsisoft offers that great protection, then,
why it was ranked so low (i.e. one-but-LAST) by the respective AV-Comparatives Test?

Some Emsisoft Fanboys have also spread another Fallacy dealing with the "Low" System Impact.
AV-Comparatives Performance Test (May 2017)
https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/avc_per_201705_en.pdf

Emsisoft had the 4th worst score based on PC Mark 8 Home Benchmark.

Is it what you finally understood?
For one more time, SONAR deals with 0-day Real-Time Protection.

SONAR deals with almost nothing. you're throwing terms that have no meaning around.... what do you call a malware that has no signature yet? fresh. or by your weird use of terms, 0-day. the term 0-day means it's brand new, nothing more, you're making it sound like it's some category that SONAR is exempt from...
i feel like i'm arguing with a PE teacher about quantum mechanics.

that impact picture is the biggest bullshit i seen so far. ESET not being on the top is just screaming.

 

[Trooper]

The fanboyism is strong in here.

 

[Fritz]

Oh the few yet precious times when that ignore option really comes in handy.

 

[212eta]

SONAR deals with almost nothing. you're throwing terms that have no meaning around

You know better than Symantec itself, don't you?

the term 0-day means it's brand new, nothing more, you're making it sound like it's some category that SONAR is exempt from

You have systematically twisted my points!
I've Never written that SONAR is exempted from 0-day Malware!
This is what I wrote:

For one more time, SONAR deals with 0-day Real-Time Protection.

The fanboyism is strong in here.

There have also been Shills,
who pretend the "always-satisfied" with particular Security software "home users",
and spread lies about it.

At the same time, they attack on the ones who dare to
bring evidence against particular Security software.

And I must have "hit a raw nerve", here.

 

[mekelek]

you will feel like Alice in Wonderland if Sonar message pops up and blocks anything.

That's how 0-day Threats need to be treated.

You know better than Symantec itself, don't you?
You have systematically twisted my points!
I've Never written that SONAR is exempted from 0-day Malware!
This is what I wrote:



There have also been Shills,
who pretend the "always-satisfied" with particular Security software "home users",
and spread lies about it.

At the same time, they attack on the ones who dare to
bring evidence against particular Security software.

And I must have "hit a raw nerve", here.

you're literally changing your narrative in every post.
I said, Sonar is barely active when malware is executed, on which you stated that's how Sonar should work, aka not work. now you're saying you didn't say that.

do i know it better than Symantec? no. do i need to lie about it? no. does Symantec need to? absolutely

you're taking marketing material over personal experience. why do you think nobody challenged what im saying in this whole thread except you? cause they agree with me. I stopped testing Norton on the Hub cause it's pointless, either it has a signature on the sample, or it doesn't, if it doesn't, the system is doomed. ransomware without signature getting downloaded by wscript from a not-yet-blacklisted url? enjoy your encrypted files and prepare the ransom.

i'm far from liking emsisoft, but at least its behavior blocker would alert at least 3 times in that line of execution i just mentioned. what would Sonar do? absolutely nothing.

 

[212eta]

i'm far from liking emsisoft, but at least its behavior blocker would alert at least 3 times in that line of execution i just mentioned. what would Sonar do? absolutely nothing.

Yeah, sure...You know how Symantec will respond to any 0-day Threat.

but when you test a sample that has no signature, you will feel like Alice in Wonderland if Sonar message pops up and blocks anything.

That's how 0-day Threats need to be treated.

Crystal Clear!
It is, by far, better for SONAR to Pop-up & Block Everything (even a False Positive)
than to Allow Everything or Pass the Responsibility to the User like what Emsisoft did, here.

why do you think nobody challenged what im saying in this whole thread except you? cause they agree with me.

Please, do Not flatter yourself so much! You are Not Andreas Clementi or Dr. Andreas Marx!
In the best-case scenario, you are just an amateur AV-Tester (among the thousands ones...) who overvalues himself...

Since you boast so much about your Testing Skills, please, present your Credentials:
Testing Methods, Testing Environment, Official Website, Professional Membership(s) etc.

For example, are you an AMTSO member?

make up your f... mind

I do have a mind, but you do Not have one, as you cannot understand plain English
and this was clearly proven a few lines above!

 

[mekelek]

Yeah, sure...You know how Symantec will respond to any 0-day Threat.


Crystal Clear!
It is, by far, better for SONAR to Pop-up & Block Everything (even a False Positive)
than to Allow Everything or Pass the Responsibility to the User like what Emsisoft did, here.

Please, do Not flatter yourself so much! You are Not Andreas Clementi or Dr. Andreas Marx!
In the best-case scenario, you are just an amateur AV-Tester (among the thousands ones...) who overvalues himself...

Since you boast so much about your Testing Skills, please, present your Credentials:
Testing Methods, Testing Environment, Official Website, Professional Membership(s) etc.

For example, are you an AMTSO member?


I do have a mind, but you do Not have one, as you cannot understand plain English
and this was clearly proven a few lines above!

I seriously think something is either wrong in your head or you don't understand basic English.
I will not go as far as getting an infraction for trying to explain something so stupidly simple to you.
Some horses need the eye blocker thingy and some born with them.

 

[509322]

It's a pointless debate.

Wait until the next AV-C test results are released.

 

[mekelek]

It's a pointless debate.

Wait until the next AV-C test results are released.

this went from discussing AVs to picking on semantics.. pointless indeed

 

[Azure]

Between Emsisoft and Norton,
I vote for Norton,
because Emsisoft is too much User Dependent.

AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Real World Protection Test Overview

Haven't bothered to read the entire thread, so I apologize if you already clarified this.

Have you ever used Emsisoft? If so, you should be aware of how Emsisoft standard behavior blocker alert looks like. Most of the time the alert will highlight the 'quarantine' option. If the user chooses any other option, it's because he/she is reasonably aware the file is either safe(allow) or malicious(delete).

In the end, all of these testing organizations do is simply confirm the Emsisoft offer as much protection as the big name companies.

 

[509322]

this went from discussing AVs to picking on semantics.. pointless indeed

It's similar to a mathematical debate that a tiny percentage of a really big number is still a big number. The debate devolves rather rapidly about what constitutes big and small numbers.

 

[Trooper]

You know better than Symantec itself, don't you?
You have systematically twisted my points!
I've Never written that SONAR is exempted from 0-day Malware!
This is what I wrote:



There have also been Shills,
who pretend the "always-satisfied" with particular Security software "home users",
and spread lies about it.

At the same time, they attack on the ones who dare to
bring evidence against particular Security software.

And I must have "hit a raw nerve", here.

You have hit nothing. You must be a liberal as you change your narrative to your liking with every post you make here. I think it is I who struck I nerve.
Personally I could care less as I have licenses for both and have used both products.

*Mic Drop*

 

[212eta]

I seriously think something is either wrong in your head or you don't understand basic English.

I proved HERE that you canNot understand plain English.
So, keep these characteriza

You have hit nothing.
You must be a liberal as you change your narrative to your liking with every post you make here.
I think it is I who struck I nerve.

Really? Better to be a Liberal than a Narrow-minded one.
As I do Not use any Real-Time (Resident) AV,
I do Not get passionate with any particular brand.

However, I cannot claim the same for several Fanboys & Shills
as they have systematically thrown mud at various Testing organizations (AV-Comparatives, AV-Test etc.)
when they put their beloved AV on Low Ranking.

Malware-Testing Hobbyists,
who lack any Professional Accreditation,
but they have easily criticized AMTSO members
without offering any Evidence against the AMTSO members' Testing patterns.

Complete Madness...