Make your video test requests!

lyldz said:
nope its windows apps. ;)
Click to expand...
ok, I did search online first as sometimes my memory fails, but Mac did come on top, but now see underneath Mac it mentions Windows. I think it was first developed for Mac, but I could be wrong about that... I see @Shadowra tested it circa Nov 2021 who confirmed it was better known in Apple circles.

malwaretips.com

Intego Antivirus 2021 | MalwareTips

Hello and welcome to the Intego test! Intego is an American company, very well known in the Apple world thanks to the VirusBarrier software. The company has...
malwaretips.com malwaretips.com
 
simmerskool said:
ok, I did search online first as sometimes my memory fails, but Mac did come on top, but now see underneath Mac it mentions Windows. I think it was first developed for Mac, but I could be wrong about that... I see @Shadowra tested it circa Nov 2021 who confirmed it was better known in Apple circles.

malwaretips.com

Intego Antivirus 2021 | MalwareTips

Hello and welcome to the Intego test! Intego is an American company, very well known in the Apple world thanks to the VirusBarrier software. The company has...
malwaretips.com malwaretips.com
Click to expand...
Yes it was originally only available for Macs.
lyldz said:
I know you are busy, I don't want more product reviews like request parts, but we need a test for intego. I'd be happy to add it to your list, even if it's at the end.
Click to expand...
When @Shadowra last tested it, he didn't recommend it. But they've released version 3 since then and possibly it would do better. Although I wouldn't be surprised if there's not much difference.
 
Hello,

I've seen all your requests. Know that I take time but I try to do them all :)

Gangelo said:
Have you considered doing just web protection tests for some products?
I have been wondering how effective the web protection (browsing security module) of Adguard Premium is and cannot find a relevant test online.
I think it would be interesting to see how effective a system security is with hardened defender (DefenderUI) + Adguard browsing security set to ON.
Click to expand...

I'm working on it ;)
I'm thinking of combining them with CyberLock or something else to spice up the test. What do you think?
 
Shadowra said:
Hello,

I've seen all your requests. Know that I take time but I try to do them all :)



I'm working on it ;)
I'm thinking of combining them with CyberLock or something else to spice up the test. What do you think?
Click to expand...
Sure, this will be interesting.
This was my previous setup (Defender with DefenderUI recommended settings + Cyberlock + Adguard Premium)
 
Shadowra said:
I'm working on it ;)
I'm thinking of combining them with CyberLock or something else to spice up the test. What do you think?
Click to expand...
I would say it will be hard enough to be clear how to count the results of Cyberlock better not add to much other stuff on top of it. What will count as block (unsafe or even suspicious) and what as a fp? Unsigned files can result in a lot of "suspicious" even when they are safe. Blocks of fp?
Tldr: I would like to see a test of CL but please be crystal clear how you will count what for a fair comparison.
 
In your videos, you have process explore open on the right hand side, with CPU showing and processes, you can toggle Virus Total and move the column next to CPU so that as samples execute the total amount of detection's can be viewed live during the test this way. I noticed you removed tcpview, its integral to showing connections spawned to drop payloads or transmit information to C&C's, during and after testing checking system files most relevant places malicious items are dropped to see if the product actually removed all traces is also relevant. Autoruns will record changes to start up entries as well and help catch changes to the files system.
It seems like a hassle, not easy to throw together, but the amount of information is helpful both for determining which products are fairing well at the time and for the makers of the products to adjust when needed.

If this seems like a lot, you should see the preparations for doing full real tests that used to take place in the Malware Hub. Much credit is do to those that used to take time to test the products thoroughly.
 
Practical Response said:
In your videos, you have process explore open on the right hand side, with CPU showing and processes, you can toggle Virus Total and move the column next to CPU so that as samples execute the total amount of detection's can be viewed live during the test this way. I noticed you removed tcpview, its integral to showing connections spawned to drop payloads or transmit information to C&C's, during and after testing checking system files most relevant places malicious items are dropped to see if the product actually removed all traces is also relevant. Autoruns will record changes to start up entries as well and help catch changes to the files system.
It seems like a hassle, not easy to throw together, but the amount of information is helpful both for determining which products are fairing well at the time and for the makers of the products to adjust when needed.

If this seems like a lot, you should see the preparations for doing full real tests that used to take place in the Malware Hub. Much credit is do to those that used to take time to test the products thoroughly.
Click to expand...

I haven't deleted it, just don't think I'll be posting it regularly.
In the videos I'll be posting, it's making a comeback.

I'll make a note for Autoruns and the rest for the next ones!
 
Freki123 said:
I would say it will be hard enough to be clear how to count the results of Cyberlock better not add to much other stuff on top of it. What will count as block (unsafe or even suspicious) and what as a fp? Unsigned files can result in a lot of "suspicious" even when they are safe. Blocks of fp?
Tldr: I would like to see a test of CL but please be crystal clear how you will count what for a fair comparison.
Click to expand...

I can activate WhiteListeCloud ;) I can upgrade to the Pro version if needed for testing :D
 
Shadowra said:
I can activate WhiteListeCloud ;) I can upgrade to the Pro version if needed for testing :D
Click to expand...
After rereading the posts above if you were thinking about a CL (with or without WLC) vs DefenderUI (Pro or not Pro) it would be a interesting thing.
But my plea as a CL user with WLC still stands (about being clear what you count which way). Because in most tests fp result in "minus" points and that rule should also apply here (at least in my mind)
Thanks for your time to produce all these tests. They are fun to watch and have an easy to understand summary in this forum here :)
 
Last edited:
Freki123 said:
I would say it will be hard enough to be clear how to count the results of Cyberlock better not add to much other stuff on top of it. What will count as block (unsafe or even suspicious) and what as a fp? Unsigned files can result in a lot of "suspicious" even when they are safe. Blocks of fp?
Tldr: I would like to see a test of CL but please be crystal clear how you will count what for a fair comparison.
Click to expand...
CyberLock will always score well in these tests because it's a default-deny product and prompts for everything. It's a product suited for advanced users only, certainly not for the majority. Yes, it will effectively block malware, but it will equally block safe programs too.

What would be a fair comparison? It will do well even if you count only unsafe ones, but you get a lot of unsafe ones for safe programs too. A fair comparison would be to test products like CyberLock or Comodo for usability. Because effective protection is inherent in default-deny products.
 
Last edited:
Kongo said:
I know you've got a load of requests and AVs on your list. But when can we expect the test of Deep Instinct with the latest version?
Click to expand...
I don't know what problems they're having, but their service timelines in Asia have been pretty anticlimactic lately.
Asian users got the 5.0.11 update almost two months after US users, and there was no "Detect DirectSyscalls" option after the update.
 
I have a fabulous idea.

How about a vid of Windows default security. With a folder of executable's and URLs on the desktop for testing. This time though trying something so simple. Upload each executable to Virus Total, if its flagged, you delete the sample, same with the URLs, instead of navigating to them directly, copy the URL and upload it to VT if its flagged, the same it gets deleted, then scan the system at the end with MD.
 
ShenguiTurmi said:
I don't know what problems they're having, but their service timelines in Asia have been pretty anticlimactic lately.
Asian users got the 5.0.11 update almost two months after US users, and there was no "Detect DirectSyscalls" option after the update.
Click to expand...
I also received the new policies within the dashboard a few days after the actual client updated.
 

Recently browsing

Members who viewed this thread in the last 5 minutes

You may also like...

Back
Top