- Apr 25, 2013
- 5,355
Excellent Malicious URL Blocking
I've been running my malicious URL blocking test since last November. I start with a feed of very new malicious URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas. I filter out those that don't point directly to malicious executables and then try launching each URL. Even though they're typically less than four hours old, many are already MIA. For the URLs that still work, I note whether the antivirus blocks access to the site entirely, blocks the malicious download, or does nothing.
avast! Free Antivirus 2014 was one of the first products to undergo this test, and for many, many months its blocking rate of 79 percent remained the top score. In the last couple weeks, that score has been thrashed repeatedly. Trend Micro Antivirus+ 2015 blocked 80 percent, a new high score. But just days later, McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015 leapt into first place with 85 percent.
ESET blocked access to 32 percent of the URLs and prevented malware download for another 49 percent. Its total blocking percentage of 81 percent doesn't beat the record, but it's respectably in second place.
Average System Scan
ESET defaults to what it calls Smart Scan for malware. I had to dig deep to find a way to launch an in-depth scan. I thought the scan was going to be quick, because the progress bar filled almost to the end in just a few minutes. However, it sat there at almost-done for quite some time. In the end, it took 26 minutes, precisely the current average.
It did report a number of items that couldn't be cleaned automatically. I found this a bit odd, as they were just static malware samples. I went ahead and let it delete them.
A repeat scan took almost as long. ESET apparently doesn't exclude known safe files from future scans the way F-Secure Anti-Virus 2015 and Trend Micro do.
Malware Blocking Oddity
With its excellent lab results and impressive malicious URL blocking, I expected ESET to do well in my hands-on malware blocking test, too. The actual results surprised me.
The minimal access that occurs when Windows Explorer gets a file's attributes for display is enough to trigger ESET's on-access scanning. As soon as I opened my folder of samples, it rapidly wiped out 38 percent of them. That's rather low; Bitdefender eliminated 83 percent on sight. I figured that, like Norton, ESET focuses less on static file identification and more on catching malicious activity.
Indeed, when I tried launching the remaining samples, ESET did wipe out quite a few of them before they could even execute. It tried to block others after installation began, but in a number of cases the malware managed to install executable files despite ESET's efforts. With 81 percent detection and 7.3 of 10 possible points, it's almost at the bottom among products tested with this same set of samples.
ESET's very good lab test results do outweigh this disappointing score, to an extent. Still, it's puzzling. F-Secure managed 9.3 points in this same test, and Trend Micro took 8.7 points.
Poor Phishing Protection
ESET's impressive performance in my malicious URL blocking test let me to hope it would display equal facility at detecting and blocking phishing (fraudulent) URLs. Alas, it did no such thing.
To test phishing protection, I gather the very newest reported frauds from websites that collect such things, so new they haven't been verified as fraudulent. I set up five test systems, each with a different form of phishing protection. One uses the product under test, of course, and one uses antiphishing champion Norton. The other three rely on phishing protection built into Chrome, Firefox, and Internet Explorer. I launch each test URL simultaneously in all five, discarding any that don't fit the definition of phishing. If any of the five browsers returns an Internet error, I discard that URL also.
Bitdefender, Kaspersky, and Webroot SecureAnywhere Antivirus (2014) are among the few products that have outperformed Norton in this test. ESET is a different story. Its detection rate lagged 53 percentage points behind Norton, 49 percent behind Chrome, and 45 percent behind Firefox.
Yes, it did beat Internet Explorer by 13 percentage points, but that's nothing to write home about. In fact, in 12 percent of the cases, ESET missed a fraudulent site that all four of the others caught. Don't turn off your browser's phishing protection!
Ups and Downs
ESET NOD32 Antivirus 8 gets generally excellent marks from the independent testing labs, and it scored very well in my malicious URL blocking test. However, in my hands-on malware blocking test it came in at the bottom, and it proved ineffective in my antiphishing test. It does offer a number of bonus security features, but the majority of these aren't accessible to the non-techie user.
It's a decent product, but I'd recommend sticking with one of our Editors' Choice antivirus products: Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2015, Kaspersky Anti-Virus (2015), or Webroot SecureAnywhere Antivirus (2014).
Full Article
ESET - default settings (HIPS, etc....)
Antivirus need to configure
