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
Inactive Support Threads
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
Security Statistics and Reports
MRG Effitas 360 Assessment & Certification – Q1 2019
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Andy Ful" data-source="post: 815455" data-attributes="member: 32260"><p>It is a kind of real world test (efficacy assesstments):</p><p><em>"When conducting these tests, we tried to simulate normal user behaviour. We are aware that a “Real World” test cannot be conducted by a team of professionals inside a lab because we understand how certain types of malware work, how malware attacks and how such attacks could be prevented. Simulating normal user behaviour means that we paid special attention to all alerts given by security applications. A pass was given only when alerts were straightforward and clearly suggested that malicious action should be blocked." </em></p><p><em>...</em></p><p><em>"Although there is no absolute definition of this kind of testing, loosely speaking, it involves the introduction of malware to an endpoint through a realistic vector, such as a browser or USB memory stick. Real World testing mostly involves “dynamic testing” (i.e. the malware is executed and then the ability of the security product to block the malware is measured). "</em></p><p></p><p>All tests were performed on Windows 10 (malware + PUA, performance), except the exploit test which was performed on Windows 7. It is a strange move because Windows Defender on Windows 7 is not the same product (much weaker) as compared to Windows Defender on Windows 10.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Andy Ful, post: 815455, member: 32260"] It is a kind of real world test (efficacy assesstments): [I]"When conducting these tests, we tried to simulate normal user behaviour. We are aware that a “Real World” test cannot be conducted by a team of professionals inside a lab because we understand how certain types of malware work, how malware attacks and how such attacks could be prevented. Simulating normal user behaviour means that we paid special attention to all alerts given by security applications. A pass was given only when alerts were straightforward and clearly suggested that malicious action should be blocked." ... "Although there is no absolute definition of this kind of testing, loosely speaking, it involves the introduction of malware to an endpoint through a realistic vector, such as a browser or USB memory stick. Real World testing mostly involves “dynamic testing” (i.e. the malware is executed and then the ability of the security product to block the malware is measured). "[/I] All tests were performed on Windows 10 (malware + PUA, performance), except the exploit test which was performed on Windows 7. It is a strange move because Windows Defender on Windows 7 is not the same product (much weaker) as compared to Windows Defender on Windows 10. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top