Assigned Evjl's Rain Zemana Report - January 2017

[Evjl's Rain]

Zemana Antimalware with Pandora.pdf

Spoiler: Links to the separate tests

https://malwaretips.com/threads/5-1-17-5.67224/#post-584518
https://malwaretips.com/threads/5-1-17-6.67199/#post-584792
https://malwaretips.com/threads/6-1-17-7.67234/#post-584625
https://malwaretips.com/threads/06-01-2017-10.67259/#post-584842
https://malwaretips.com/threads/mixed-samples-3.67295/#post-585272
https://malwaretips.com/threads/08-01-2017-3.67309/#post-585462
https://malwaretips.com/threads/9-1-2017-8.67354/#post-585924
https://malwaretips.com/threads/10-01-2017-4.67373/#post-586105
https://malwaretips.com/threads/spora-ransomware.67407/#post-586431
https://malwaretips.com/threads/11-1-2017-6.67436/#post-586684

 

[Evjl's Rain]

I decided to stop testing zemana AM so these are the results
You can decide its effectiveness based on the table above but you should take results with a grain of salt

Zemana is great as a second opinion scanner however its realtime protection with pandora is lacking against zero-day malwares. It has great signatures so it can protect you against older malwares

 

[Adz.]

Thank you for the report, hopefully the devs will look at this :--)

 

[Aktiffiso]

I will consider not use semana. I really think is a very good product bur that...

 

[XhenEd]

@TwinHeadedEagle What happened?

 

[harlan4096]

It seems ZAM is quite good as a second opinion scanner but not so good as a resident protection...

 

[cryogent]

I suppose ZAL has the same problems considering that ZAM is included.
And if it stops the Pandora from settings the results are worse or better?

 

[Evjl's Rain]

I suppose ZAL has the same problems considering that ZAM is included.
And if it stops the Pandora from settings the results are worse or better?

ZAL will have the same result. Without pandora, it can only be worse. I think when pandora is off, dynamic tests will be all 0.

the problem with ZAM's realtime protection is it doesn't scan every access of the PC, perhaps to reduce server load. The fact is when I ran the malwares, the system was infected and then I performed a system scan with zemana, it found so many malwares -_-
I emailed to zemana support and they said they passed this message to the developers

 

[SHvFl]

Seems like pandora sucks or doesn't support the kind of files the malware runs(script?) but i am too lazy to go check the topics with the malware :S

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Seems like pandora sucks or doesn't support the kind of files the malware runs(script?) but i am too lazy to go find the topics with the malware :S

I think it sucks. I executed .exe files but it was silent
at 1 test I saw it didn't scan .hta file by static scan

 

[Sundaram999]

Thanks for report! Well done)))

 

[SHvFl]

I think it sucks. I executed .exe files but it was silent
at 1 test I saw it didn't scan .hta file by static scan

Yeah, you run an exe but maybe that was just the downloader of the malware? Maybe the actual malware executed was not exe and pandora ignores it?

Anw one or the other way it sucks especially when this program sucks memory pretending it's chrome.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Yeah, you run an exe but maybe that was just the downloader of the malware? Maybe the actual malware executed was not exe and pandora ignores it?

Anw one or the other way it sucks.

yeah, many of them were downloaders. Zemana didn't have the signatures for them and when the parent files were passed, dropped files were likely to be allowed without being scanned
I was confused when I say this because when I executed a .hta file, zemana was able to block the dropped malware in temp folder. However when I executed .exe downloaders, zemana allowed everything

 

[SHvFl]

yeah, many of them were downloaders. Zemana didn't have the signatures for them and when the parent files were passed, dropped files were likely to be allowed without being scanned
I was confused when I say this because when I executed a .hta file, zemana was able to block the dropped malware in temp folder. However when I executed .exe downloaders, zemana allowed everything

I will need to check the actual malware to know more but anw something is wrong. Had similar disappointing experience every time i tried the program and i skipped it for a few months now.

 

[_CyberGhosT_]

Thanks for sharing some honest results.
That and the constant net usage is why I jumped on board with SurfRight.
HMPA and HMP are a dynamic duo that outperform both Zemana's quite handily.
Great share Rain

 

[Deleted member 2913]

I simply dont like the idea of supplementary/complementary realtime AV...1 good realtime AV is enough & go with anti-executable or other protection mechanism.

 

[Zero Knowledge]

I have a license for Zemana but it has always seemed a amateur type AV/AM.

Tests like these confirm it's really not that good at protection. 33% of malware samples was not detected!

Biggest problem for me is Zemana won't confirm what AV engine they are using. Strikes me as strange behavior.

 

[cryogent]

[SIZE=4]@Evjl's Rain[/SIZE] i know there have been tests "who vs who" and is a sensitive issue but it would be possible to do a test with exactly the same malware samples but on other two programs: MBAM 3.0 and Emsisoft AM.
Just to see how its handle.

 

[TwinHeadedEagle]

Just tested all 7 samples within 11th January archive with Pandora enabled and all of them were blocked.

Are you sure you had Real Time Protection ON like on the image below and Pandora enabled?

@TwinHeadedEagle What happened?

Nothing happened, this test is not valid

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Just tested all 7 samples within 11th January archive with Pandora enabled and all of them were blocked.

Are you sure you had Real Time Protection ON like on the image below and Pandora enabled?

yes of course I had it enabled, always double checked them before the tests and also performed a scan to see if the internet connection was intact or not. That's why there were some detections in Dynamic tests