- Mar 15, 2011
- 13,070
Jul/Aug AV-Test.org (Windows 7)
- Thread starter jamescv7
- Start date
- Jan 24, 2011
- 9,378
Now that's a first... KIS 2012 on the 1st place..Didn't see them up-there from quite some time now, while MSE 2.0 showed in this test the limitation of a simple antivirus .... with AVG and Avast Free basically showing MSE how it's done
Number of malware samples used by AV-TEST :
Protection against 0-day malware attacks, inclusive of web and e-mail threats (Real-World Testing) : Samples used: 79
Detection of a representative set of malware discovered in the last 2-3 months (AV-Test reference set) : Samples used: 230,452
Detection of widespread and prevalent malware (according to AV-TEST data) : Samples used: 5,000
And again a simple question: Why wasn't COMODO tested???
Number of malware samples used by AV-TEST :
Protection against 0-day malware attacks, inclusive of web and e-mail threats (Real-World Testing) : Samples used: 79
Detection of a representative set of malware discovered in the last 2-3 months (AV-Test reference set) : Samples used: 230,452
Detection of widespread and prevalent malware (according to AV-TEST data) : Samples used: 5,000
And again a simple question: Why wasn't COMODO tested???
Jack said:
because they are the rebels against the Empire
more seriously, i really think they will wait CIS v6
comodo (and its CEO, Melhi) said many times that current AV tests organization value the detection and removal of the tested apps, and CIS is focused on prevention. (something like that)
Littlebits
Retired Staff
- May 3, 2011
- 3,893
umbrapolaris said:
Melhi has used so many different excuses of why Comodo won't join testing that I have lost count. What I believe is Melhi is afraid of failure. In many AV testing environments, AV products will fail if they detect false positives, block safe processes, are not novice user friendly, slow down Windows (nothing to do with RAM), etc.
I have no doubt that CIS offers supreme protection under the hands of advanced users, therefore there is really no reason why CIS wouldn't be the best protection for advanced users if they really needed that kind of protection. However many advanced users already know about how to avoid security problems and don't need this kind of extra protection.
But putting CIS in the hands of a novice user will equal total failure. That's how most of the tests operate. I do agree with Melhi to a certain point, I don't believe there is any AV tests that can show CIS full potentials. CIS is very unique and doesn't appeal to most users because of its complexity. AV testing sites would be very harsh on CIS and to a point wouldn't give it a fare rating.
I seriously don't believe Melhi will ever open the doors for CIS to be tested by AV testing sites.
Thanks.
Littlebits said:
He doesn't care if it gets tested. He's just not going to pay for it to be tested unless he agrees with the testing methodology.
Littlebits said:
i agree
i agree less in that part, if you allow me a comparison, even a champion of car racing will still use the seat-belt and airbags of his daily use car.
i very agree, cant say better.
Littlebits
Retired Staff
- May 3, 2011
- 3,893
HeffeD said:
Let me rephrase my statement:
I don't think Melhi will ever agree to any testing methodology therefore CIS will never get tested. Testing sites have their own rules and they are not going to change them just because one vendor doesn't agree with them.
So if you are a CIS users and it does its job for you, then you really don't need a test to prove anything, you are the living proof. But if CIS is not working for you there are many other options that you can use that do have tests to verify how it works. Don't hold your breathe waiting on CIS to be tested.
Thanks.
Nathan Wootton
Level 1
- May 25, 2011
- 313
One reason why i dont like comodo it keeps sandboxing/restricting valid files like dwm.exe (windows file?) ccc.exe wich is apart of ATI control center and logitech setpoint, personally for me to ever use comodo they need to improve it, would also like to see av corp test it
Have you try v.5.8? Do you see any improvement with restricting valid files?
Most of the files are non-sign so that's highly the case.
With the previous build it always forget its settings even after being put to trusted.
They really improved with the 5.8 build, both in whitelisting and sandboxing.
Thanks
Most of the files are non-sign so that's highly the case.
With the previous build it always forget its settings even after being put to trusted.
They really improved with the 5.8 build, both in whitelisting and sandboxing.
Thanks
Nathan Wootton said:
that is the purpose of an HIPS (allow or block), i use CIS (and CFW before when the AV part was not yet added) and after i allowed a process/file, it never bothered me anymore. Remember that Comodo FW was a software for advanced users (knowing what they do), before its popularity decide its developers to make it more friendly.
Similar threads
