Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
[FAILED] Kaspersky Free Antivirus 2018 vs Troldesh Ransomware
Message
<blockquote data-quote="kamla5abi" data-source="post: 657583" data-attributes="member: 62094"><p>Point 1:</p><p>Note how he said "Comodo Firewall" </p><p></p><p>Note how the video you posted clearly says "Comodo Cloud AV" <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite110" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>those are not the same product, nor do they have the exact same protection schemes (especially at CS settings, which probably everyone who's spent any time researching how to setup comodo firewall at MalwareTips would have found) so your retort to [USER=30916]@SHvFl[/USER] 's statement doesn't work....</p><p>Then lets say we're talking about the noob user, it's likely they wouldn't even use CFW to begin with...</p><p>they will go with some other product that looks easier to use and probably use at default settings most likely (install & forget)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Point 2:</p><p>you also say the samples tested by MalwareBlocker's video in the 1st post is zero day right? How do you know? does he somehow show/prove to the viewer they are zero day? how do you prove they are zero day? </p><p>zero day means fully undetectable (best case scenario and meaning) or at least low signature detection results right?</p><p>Does he show the virustotal report on them? to show they are not signature detected by majority of companies yet before testing?</p><p>No.</p><p></p><p>look in the malware hub on this site</p><p>uploaders of actual zero day malware show virustotal reports of the malware scans before they upload them</p><p>many of them have low detections (partially undetectable) some of them really low detections (closer to actual zero day fully undetectable malware)</p><p>showing that at the time of the scan, those malwares were only detected by few AV companies/products</p><p></p><p>so if you test those samples with a product that doesnt yet have signature detection for that specific malware variant at the time, that will give you a pretty good idea of how the product does with true in the wild malware that is undetected yet when you look at tests done over a long period of time </p><p>Remember that KAF was only recently "discovered" and tests have been over a really short period of time...</p><p>but people know you can't make a generalization about anything with such a small sample size of tested malware also...</p><p></p><p>statistically speaking, any claim of a product having X % protection rate with even 10000 samples is not going to hold up</p><p>(since the population that claim is trying to represent and generalize to is exponentially bigger in size).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="kamla5abi, post: 657583, member: 62094"] Point 1: Note how he said "Comodo Firewall" Note how the video you posted clearly says "Comodo Cloud AV" ;) those are not the same product, nor do they have the exact same protection schemes (especially at CS settings, which probably everyone who's spent any time researching how to setup comodo firewall at MalwareTips would have found) so your retort to [USER=30916]@SHvFl[/USER] 's statement doesn't work.... Then lets say we're talking about the noob user, it's likely they wouldn't even use CFW to begin with... they will go with some other product that looks easier to use and probably use at default settings most likely (install & forget) Point 2: you also say the samples tested by MalwareBlocker's video in the 1st post is zero day right? How do you know? does he somehow show/prove to the viewer they are zero day? how do you prove they are zero day? zero day means fully undetectable (best case scenario and meaning) or at least low signature detection results right? Does he show the virustotal report on them? to show they are not signature detected by majority of companies yet before testing? No. look in the malware hub on this site uploaders of actual zero day malware show virustotal reports of the malware scans before they upload them many of them have low detections (partially undetectable) some of them really low detections (closer to actual zero day fully undetectable malware) showing that at the time of the scan, those malwares were only detected by few AV companies/products so if you test those samples with a product that doesnt yet have signature detection for that specific malware variant at the time, that will give you a pretty good idea of how the product does with true in the wild malware that is undetected yet when you look at tests done over a long period of time Remember that KAF was only recently "discovered" and tests have been over a really short period of time... but people know you can't make a generalization about anything with such a small sample size of tested malware also... statistically speaking, any claim of a product having X % protection rate with even 10000 samples is not going to hold up (since the population that claim is trying to represent and generalize to is exponentially bigger in size). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top