My newest 25 av test

[taleblou]

I understand the baseline is 43 seconds, however the columns indicate the boot is increased by a substantial amount.

Could you clarify the Boot Times? Are they total seconds, or on-top off the baseline?

Example:
Base time of 43 seconds + AVG Free Antivirus (Increased by 55 seconds) = Total Boot Time is 98 seconds.

---

<removed>

---

Well I calculated using the time it too to bootup (used baidu boot-up counter) minus the base time and the difference is what I put there.

As an example and app with "increase of 10 seconds" was calculated this way.

Base (fresh clean no app pc) took 0:43 minters (43 seconds) too boot-up
Lets call it App "A" took 0:53 minutes to boot up . so I used 0:53 - 0:43 = 10. This meant it took 10 second longer to boot-up with the "App A" installed after boot-up.

 

[ZeroDay]

Comodo leak test is out dated and doesn't work correctly especially with the new CIS. Google it and you will see the info.

Edit: I've looked for the info but I can't find it, however I know CLT doesn't work correctly with the new firewall. Perhaps someone here with more knowledge on Comodo could explain?

 

[taleblou]

Comodo leak test is out dated and doesn't work correctly especially with the new CIS. Google it and you will see the info.

Edit: I've looked for the info but I can't find it, however I know CLT doesn't work correctly with the new firewall. Perhaps someone here with more knowledge on Comodo could explain?

Well out-dated does not mean it does not work properly. In the test it seems that it did work as it opened browser and connected to ips and all sort of stuff. Still only emsisoft's online armour that was included as part of emsisoft internet security pack was the only firewall that passed and blocked all tempering. Although comodo came 2nd.

Anyway, HIPS is different then a firewall. A firewall leak test is different then a HIPS test. you should not confuse it with a firewall. HIPS protect against exe and programs running and not hack or leaks. They do not offer protection against leaks and hacks. That's firewall job.

 

[ZeroDay]

No when I say outdated I mean it doesn't work properly with CIS 6. I'm not confusing a hips and a firewall where did you get that from? I know exactly the difference between what hips protects and what a firewall protects its my job to know lmao, I think even children know that difference. Anyway I know there is some issue between CLT and comodo 6.x But it'll need one of the comodo mods chiron or hefd to explain exactly what that problem is.

 

[ZeroDay]

Please see http://malwaretips.com/Thread-Anti-malware-ru-Test-firewalls-to-protect-against-internal-attacks-July-2013 where online armour comes third behind Bitdefender.

 

[Ink]

If CIS v6.x has been out for this long, why haven't Comodo seeked to find a solution, unless they think CLT is now irrelevant.

 

[ZeroDay]

I don't know Earth as I said those questions will have to be answered by one of the Comodo mods that post here. I just remember reading about CLT not working correctly with the new CIS 6.X, or rather not being able to asses CIS 6.X correctly. The why's and wherefores escape me, it's been awhile since I read it, but I'm sure one of the Comodo mods can explain.

Waits to be called a comodo fanboy

 

[technology]

I tested Online armor, CFW and CIS with CLT, all with default setting
OA score: 260/340
CFW score: 340/340
CIS score: 190/340

edit: test system: W8 Pro x64

 

[taleblou]

I tested Online armor and CFW with CLT, both with default setting
OA score: 260/340
CFW score: 340/340

Well good. It could be different OP system. It might work differently or same based on if its a 32bit or 64bit or if it is xp, vista, 7 or 8 or the type of router ad connection you may have. So results do differ. You could also be right as each system differs. THE TESTS I DO IS TO GET AN IDEA AND I DO NOT BELONG TO BIG FIRMS THAT HAVE MADE A REPUTATION AND DO THESE TYPE OF TESTS. AGAIN EACH SITUATION IS DIFFERENT.

Also I will later do a firewall test and this time will use PC flank leak test tool: http://www.pcflank.com/pcflankleaktest.htm which is more reliable then clt test and also their browser test: http://www.pcflank.com/browser_test1.htm to see if any personal info is leaked or not.

I will post it once finished under a new top here.

 

[taleblou]

Please see http://malwaretips.com/Thread-Anti-malware-ru-Test-firewalls-to-protect-against-internal-attacks-July-2013 where online armour comes third behind Bitdefender.

Personally I do not place my faith on any external companies that do tests as these companies can be biased or are paid to test and maybe bought up by certain security suite firms to manipulate the result.

There had been incident like this in the past. With comodo and AV-comparative and norton for examples.

Personally I base my own protection on my own tests. BUT YOU ARE FREE TO CHOOSE.

I think you should look at the result of many testing sites and decide on that.

 

[Ink]

Do these Firewall tests mean anything, when you have a Hardware Firewall (router or custom box)?

 

[taleblou]

No when I say outdated I mean it doesn't work properly with CIS 6. I'm not confusing a hips and a firewall where did you get that from? I know exactly the difference between what hips protects and what a firewall protects its my job to know lmao, I think even children know that difference. Anyway I know there is some issue between CLT and comodo 6.x But it'll need one of the comodo mods chiron or hefd to explain exactly what that problem is.

Sorry , the hips part was my answer to another poster and not you. I apologize.

 

[taleblou]

Do these Firewall tests mean anything, when you have a Hardware Firewall (router or custom box)?

I have talked to many experts and they all same the same thing. If you have a router with its firewall active (hardware firewall) then windows firewall is all you safe as it is. Infection and compromise comes from malwares and from browsing or using infected portables. SO if you use a good av with HIPS and multi-layer protection then you do not need to worry. SO having a powerful firewall is a waste of resources.

 

[taleblou]

Please see http://malwaretips.com/Thread-Anti-malware-ru-Test-firewalls-to-protect-against-internal-attacks-July-2013 where online armour comes third behind Bitdefender.

Here is a good one and shows very different result from http://www.matousec.com/. Bitdefender got 6th place, but as I say each test is different. I will run a new test on firewalls as I mentioned in my other post.

 

[taleblou]

Please see http://malwaretips.com/Thread-Anti-malware-ru-Test-firewalls-to-protect-against-internal-attacks-July-2013 where online armour comes third behind Bitdefender.

The test in your link is at preventing attack and not a leak test. A leak test means that lets say you pc is compromise and how good does you firewall prevent the hacks from leaking your info. So that's different. AVs, HIPS and other security apps also do the job that your test link shows.

 

[taleblou]

here is the latest test from AV-TEST a reputable company according to many. Set the protection from high to low to see which protected better.

http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/mayjun-2013

 

[ZeroDay]

I'm happy with CIS and doing my own testing, I'm getting a dedicated testing machine soon so I'll be doing a lot of in depth test. Anyway taleblou I think you're doing a good job so keep up the good work.

 

[ZeroDay]

OK, for CIS to score 340/340 turn the sandbox off and the hips on, at the first hips alert select 'limited' and the second hips alert select isolated = 340/340.