Robbie

Level 27
Content Creator
Verified
Anotación 2018-12-03 134727.jpg
Leo moves the malware folder to the desktop while having ESET protection being fully turned OFF. (check picture above)

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but malware can be triggered by several factors:
  • Manual execution
  • Extraction
  • Moved
  • Scanned
As a plus, we don't have access to see active process to double check if none of the mentioned malware is active at the time he starts his test. Therefore this test is garbage.

ESET should consider implementing Dynamic engine to cope up with their Behavior based protection
Impressive signatures may not be enough!
ESET as a default solution is known to be weak. Luckily it offers hundreds -literally hundreds- of tweaking options. Still if you don't like to configure your product, ESET is not for you.

Check this thread: Q&A - ESET configuration thread
 

Raiden

Level 11
Content Creator
Verified
Leo moves the malware folder to the desktop while having ESET protection being fully turned OFF. (check picture above)

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but malware can be triggered by several factors:
  • Manual execution
  • Extraction
  • Moved
  • Scanned
As a plus, we don't have access to see active process to double check if none of the mentioned malware is active at the time he starts his test. Therefore this test is garbage.
Ah another high quality test from Leo. I really question if he knows what he's doing at times. If anything all this proves is to take these tests with a grain of salt, they don't represent the real world.

ESET as a default solution is known to be weak. Luckily it offers hundreds -literally hundreds- of tweaking options. Still if you don't like to configure your product, ESET is not for you.

Check this thread: Q&A - ESET configuration thread
I agree, it's a very capable product, needs a little tweaking, but if you look at all its features as a whole it pretty much covers everything.
 

razorfancy

Level 2
Verified
Leo moves the malware folder to the desktop while having ESET protection being fully turned OFF. (check picture above)

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but malware can be triggered by several factors:
  • Manual execution
  • Extraction
  • Moved
  • Scanned
As a plus, we don't have access to see active process to double check if none of the mentioned malware is active at the time he starts his test. Therefore this test is garbage.
Sorry but I have to disagree, he does the same thing for every test and other products got a lot better results + before he start running the script that runs the malware he enable the Eset protection again.

Bitdefender Internet Security 2019 Review

Kaspersky Internet Security 2019 Review
 

askalan

Level 16
Malware Hunter
Verified
Therefore this test is garbage.
He disabled the protection to drag the samples folder to the desktop. Before testing, he enabled the protection. Did you watch the whole video or did I miss something? Even if some info is missing (he doesn't show the processes like you said) I think he didn't intentionally manipulate the test.

And besides, you have already said that the product is not good.
 

Robbie

Level 27
Content Creator
Verified
What I mean is that the methodology in this test is not valid, like any other basic test he does. We all know malware does not have to necessarily be manually double clicked in order to run. There's a reason why we do not download malware on our host machine, even if we don't execute it manually. And that's because that malware file can be triggered without double clicking it, for example: when our antivirus scans it, when some tool accesses it, when we extract it or move it. Depending on the coding, several ways a malware can find to be triggered without our explicit consent. I think we all know that, don't we? And that's the simplest reason and argument to explain how antivirus detect and delete files without us even opening it: because they scan before we get to execute, and this can trigger the malware. So, if scanning, moving, extracting, can trigger the malware, and we move a huge malware folder from one place to another, with our real time protection disabled, this can be potentially harmful for our system, can it not? Plus, we all should know that a single active infection can alter the whole testing process and methodology, therefore why we always recommend to test one malware at a time and reset the VM. How can we know this wasn't the case? You may say: Leo always does this and other software performed better. Haven't we all also mentioned all OS are different? Aren't all malware different? Aren't all antivirus different? Don't wanna sound like a fanboy, but all software have their PRO's and CON's. ESET may suck at default settings, but this doesn't make it a bad software, it makes it a suitable software for advanced users. I don't recommend ESET to novices or people who don't wanna deal with alerts, and this is why. But if we're gonna say this methodology is valid then I believe this discussion is over.
 

Robbie

Level 27
Content Creator
Verified
Eh, mmhh, yeah. Actually, that's not true unless there is a security hole/bug.
Despite this is true and most attacks of this type will need a bug or vulnerability, there are way(s) which do not rely upon vulnerabilities, such as a library file being dropped somewhere where software can be exploited with binary planting -which cannot be considered as a vulnerability.

Anyways, the fact a vulnerability is required to trigger a malware file doesn't make it an impossible scenario. When you have thousands of cybercriminals looking for bugs and security holes, it's a matter of time since these things occur. And since final users won't know a security hole exists until some researcher publishes it, we shall take this affirmations as valid.
 
Last edited:

uduoix

Level 4
ESET is not good as used to be. Even support doesn't care anymore. Once they don't know how to fix problem they just start to ignore emails. I have no idea what is going on with ESET but slowly going to the bottom. I've been their customer for 10+ years and now i'm done with them.
 

SumTingWong

Level 22
Verified
@SumTingWong


I doubt that in this test you evaluate the lightness of the antivirus!
Some people are not even use any antivirus at all, and they manage to keep their computers clean. I rather have a lightness antivirus than heavy usage AV that makes my PC crawl to turtle instantly. No security software can protect you if you are being reckless. Heck, WD is enough for non reckless users.