Do you agree with the latest results of AV-Test ?

  • Yes, they know what they are doing.

    Votes: 5 9.4%
  • I have some doubts, but i somewhat believe them.

    Votes: 28 52.8%
  • I disagree with their results.

    Votes: 8 15.1%
  • I don't trust any independent testing lab anyway.

    Votes: 12 22.6%
  • Total voters
    53
M

MSDOS8bit

Everybody knows Microsoft scores top in Prevalence tests, as was reported last year.

When the people's favourite Antivirus scores below another product they think is mediocre, there's no reason for them to assume the tests are flawed. That's why I use software that works for me and not give a damn what others say "why you using that PoC software...". :)

Don't forget that no words are spoken when Microsoft scores the least points.
Yeah i guess you're right, i didn't saw it that way. That's a wonderful piece of advice there. Thanks a lot ;)
 
D

Deleted member 178

Still, to see Eset and Avira beat by Microsoft Security Essentials, whatever the methodology of the tests where, is like looking at a car test saying that a Toyota family van has surpassed a Ferrari and a Mercedes in term of speed. I understand now there's more to it, but still that was kind of hard to believe (and still is). Anyway thanks for taking the time to answer me ;)
All depend the criterias of the test, the Toyota family car surely has more comfortable seats and consume less gasoline for 100km than a Ferrari...so it will win those tests over the Ferrari.
It is why reading the methodology is important before reading the results. When i saw it, i wasn't surprised.
If you read the methodology: 11000+ old malware used , common people will almost never encounter 0-days , they will mostly get hit by old malware, it is why WD/MSE is efficient as base security for non-techie people.
 

reboot

Level 3
Verified
All depend the criterias of the test, the Toyota family car surely has more comfortable seats and consume less gasoline for 100km than a Ferrari...so it will win those tests over the Ferrari.
It is why reading the methodology is important before reading the results. When i saw it, i wasn't surprised.
If you read the methodology: 11000+ old malware used , common people will almost never encounter 0-days , they will mostly get hit by old malware, it is why WD/MSE is efficient as base security for non-techie people.
Nice metaphor or is it an analogy? Anyway one of those. ;)
 

Winter Soldier

Level 25
Antivirus tests have a benefit, they respond to the classic question of the average user: what is the best AV?
Technically, they are valid, but the results are related only to the malware pack used in the specific test.
When an average user sees 100% detection for X antivirus then he chooses it but the reason is psychological and related to the marketing work, it is a very simple subliminal message.
Of course, X antivirus got 100% detection in the test, but this absolutely does not mean it is the best.
The dynamic malware evolution does not provide a static dominant position for a product, simply and technically, these tests do not provide reliable answers in the long time.
 

ZeroDay

Level 28
Verified
Malware Tester
Yes, i agree that what matters are indeed the results in the long run. And i understand that AV-Test are a respectable company. Still, to see Eset and Avira beat by Microsoft Security Essentials, whatever the methodology of the tests where, is like looking at a car test saying that a Toyota family van has surpassed a Ferrari and a Mercedes in term of speed. I understand now there's more to it, but still that was kind of hard to believe (and still is). Anyway thanks for taking the time to answer me ;)
Yes, I do agree.
 

Arequire

Level 23
Verified
Content Creator
When an average user sees 100% detection for X antivirus then he chooses it but the reason is psychological and related to the marketing work, it is a very simple subliminal message.
Of course, X antivirus got 100% detection in the test, but this absolutely does not mean it is the best.
This is the exact reason why I have a problem with professional testing labs using percentages. All the average user sees is X product got 100% detection and they're thinking to themselves "100%! It protects against everything!" It creates a false sense of security for the people most vulnerable of infection.
It also doesn't help when the media then blurts out those scores to the masses claiming that X product provides perfect security and AV vendors themselves who just love to slap those results all over their websites and claim their product is the 'best' because it achieved 100% detection in prevalent and zero-day tests a whole 7 months back.
 

lab34

Level 6
Hello,
Interesting thread indeed.
A month ago, I was happy to use "Avira free", because "Avira paid" was on top of "the tests" :oops:

I can add that some blogs just publish the hardcopy of the graph and sometime the link to the interactive graph: AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Real World Protection Test Overview

In non english speaking countries, some blogs interprets the results and give their analyse.
So there is space for misunderstood.

For example, here is a translation of a french blog:
The podium is wide at the beginning of the year and of the seven that share it (Avast and Emsisoft do not have 100% without help from the user) there is one that stands out. Panda Free Antivirus 18.0 is free, lightweight, only Windows-compatible, but it offers 100% protection this month and therefore makes a noteworthy entry into the analyst's ranking.

So in brief: Panda Free offers 100% protection this month.
 

Quassar

Level 12
Verified
This is totaly bulshit not test
i hunt malware and i have offen 0 day malware in my lab mostly non one of AV vendor dont even pass 20%
2nd thinks what its interesting in thier result all AV have high good score above 90% there is no one who have 15 meaby 50%... all stay near same hight score....

For good price AV-Compromitate will give you all good high score...
 
D

Deleted member 178

This is totaly bulshit not test
i hunt malware and i have offen 0 day malware in my lab mostly non one of AV vendor dont even pass 20%
2nd thinks what its interesting in thier result all AV have high good score above 90% there is no one who have 15 meaby 50%... all stay near same hight score....

For good price AV-Compromitate will give you all good high score...
And we go again.. you didn't read the methodology right? this tests isn't about 0-days...it is about prevalence with 11k old malwares and 195 zero-days...

Please read before posting...
 

FreddyFreeloader

Level 31
Verified
And once again people don't read the test methodology.

AV-TEST – The Independent IT-Security Institute

This test is all about Widespread/Prevalence , and we all know that MS is the best security apps about prevalence , its database is unmatched. Now, if it was focused on 0-day test , it would fall behind.

People , read before stating...

Anyway , Test Labs are just a representation of a given data in a given moment. So useless.
BINGO!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: frogboy

Sunshine-boy

Level 27
Verified
0 day mean malware which from 1st expose dont left 24 hours
so malware since 4 weeks is no anymore 0 day ....
take a look:
AV-TEST – The Independent IT-Security Institute
i think he(umbra) is talking about this--->((The most important category where the protective effect of products is concerned is the test against current online threats. This involves accessing known malicious websites or e-mails in order to test whether the protection product is able to ward off attacks.))
AV-test talking about known malwares ! not zero-day malware
I'm not good in English:p sorry, but I think, it's not 0-day malware testing
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 178

0 day mean malware which from 1st expose dont left 24 hours
so malware since 4 weeks is no anymore 0 day ....
Thank you i know that :rolleyes: , as if you will teach me what is a zero-day...it is why i said this test is about prevalence = old malware = your statement was wrong.