Panda Dome Free 18 - December 2018 Report

harlan4096

Moderator
Thread author
Verified
Staff Member
Malware Hunter
Well-known
Apr 28, 2015
8,635
Panda Dome Free 18 + NVT SYSHARDENED (Default) - December 2018 Report
Due to the small number of samples used in this tests, you should take results with a grain of salt. We encourage you to compare these results with others and take informed decisions on what security products to use.
Total Samples tested: 126 (100%)
Total Static Detections: 36 (28,57%)
Total Dynamic Detections: 6 (4,76%)
Total Not Detected/Missed: 80 (63,49%)
Total Detected/Blocked: 46 (36,50%)



Total samples pack been tested: 20
Total final status of the system (clean): 7
Total final status of the system (protec
ted): 7
Total final status of the system (infected): 5
Total final status of the system (encrypted): 4
* Dynamic BB Bonus Test (PD resident AV module disabled)
* Partially Blocked
* BSR: Before System Reboot
* ASR: After System Reboot

December
2018
Samples
Pack
Static
Detection
Dynamic
Detection
Total
Detection
Bait Files
Encrypted
2nd Opinion
Scanners
System
Final Status
Thread
Link


01/12/2018​



1​



0 / 1​



1 / 1​



1 / 1​



No



Clean



Clean






04/12/2018​



17​



3 / 17​



2 / 15​



5 / 17​



No



BSR: Infected

ASR: Not Clean



BSR: Infected

ASR: Prot. - NC






07/12/2018​



20​



4 / 20​



1 / 16​



5 / 20​



No



N/A



Encrypted

Twice






08/12/2018​



1​



1 / 1​



1 / 1*



1 / 1​



No



BSR: Infected*

ASR: Infected*



Clean

Infected*






08/12/2018​



1​



1 / 1​



1 / 1*



1 / 1​



No



Clean



Clean






09/01/2018​



1​



1 / 1​



1 / 1*



1/ 1​



No



Clean



Clean






10/12/2018​



14​



2 / 14​



0 / 12​



2 / 14​



No



N/A



Infected

& Encrypted






13/12/2018​



13​



4 / 13​



0 / 9​



4 / 13​



No



Infected



Infected?






14/12/2018​



1​



0 / 1​



0 / 1​



0 / 1​



No



Clean



Protected






15/12/2018​



1​



0 / 1​



1 / 1​



1 / 1​



No



BSR: Infected

ASR: Not Clean



BSR: Infected

ASR: Prot. - NC






15/12/2018​



1​



1 / 1​



0 / 1*



1 / 1​



No

No*



-

Encrypted*



Clean

Encrypted*






15/12/2018​



1​



1 / 1​



1 / 1*



1 / 1​



No



Clean



Clean






16/12/2018​



1​



0 / 1​



0 / 1​



0 / 1​



No



Clean



Protected






19/12/2018​



2​



2 / 2​



0 / 2*



2 / 2​



No



Clean

Protected*



Clean

Protected*






20/12/2018​



1​



0 / 1​



0 / 1​



0 / 1​



Yes



N/A



Infected

Encrypted






19/12/2018​



18​



3 / 18​



0 / 15​



3 / 18​



Yes



Infected

Encrypted



Infected

Encrypted






19/12/2018​



19​



8 / 19​



0 / 11​



8 / 19​



No



BSR: Infected

ASR: Not Clean



BSR: Infected

ASR: Prot. - NC






21/12/2018​



5​



3 / 5​



2 / 2*



3 / 5​



No



Clean



Protected






23/12/2018​



6​



2 / 5​



0 / 2​

2 / 2*



2 / 5​



No



Clean

Not Clean*



PRotected

Prot. - NC*






24/12/2018​



2​



0 / 2​



1 / 2​



1 / 2​



No



Clean



Protected



































































 
Last edited:

harlan4096

Moderator
Thread author
Verified
Staff Member
Malware Hunter
Well-known
Apr 28, 2015
8,635
I follow the methodology that probably is similar to all the others testers here (there are rules in the Hub to perform the tests).

We always run a signature updates before run on demand scans, that's why We must publish a screen-shot of the update report.

Also I enabled in PDF the setting to synchronize before scans... it seems Panda Dome does not has almost offline signatures, and its BB is also in cloud (or mostly based on)... so an offline testing would be probably even worse :sick:
 

stefanos

Level 28
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Oct 31, 2014
1,712
I follow the methodology that probably is similar to all the others testers here (there are rules in the Hub to perform the tests).

We always run a signature updates before run on demand scans, that's why We must publish a screen-shot of the update report.

Also I enabled in PDF the setting to synchronize before scans... it seems Panda Dome does not has almost offline signatures, and its BB is also in cloud (or mostly based on)... so an offline testing would be probably even worse :sick:
(y)(y)
 

ChemicalB

Level 8
Verified
Sep 14, 2018
360
Not exceptional results.
The problem is Panda (free), but also the malware itself, indeed if we consider the static analysis, often the obfuscation of the code may be sufficient to evade AV detection.
The dynamic analysis seeks what happens after the malware execution and then processes, active services and the execution of secondary code.
This method is useful but often inaccurate, especially if the malware injects its process in the process of a legit application.

Now I don't know if they use the best technologies for the paid version, but, according to this report, the free version is not advisable imo.
 

vertigo

Level 2
Verified
Mar 18, 2018
75
I've tested OSA and SysHardener a bit. I realize SH is lower resources because it's a tweaker (vaccine) vs always running like OSA, though OSA seems to be pretty light anyways. I prefer OSA because it's less involved and it's interactive, and SH is still fairly new and perhaps not quite ready for use by the "masses" as it may still break some stuff. So I'm curious why you guys choose one or the other, why SH was used here instead of OSA, if OSA would do better than SH (some comments seem to indicate it's better), and if a test could be done using it instead to see if Panda provides acceptable results, because there were an awful lot of infections in this one despite having it combined with SH.
 

vertigo

Level 2
Verified
Mar 18, 2018
75
I performed the tests with this specific combo because previously already tested OSA + Panda, and some users asked me to check how would perform PDF + SH :)

Also OSA seems stronger than SH in prevention, both in default settings...

Thanks. I saw your previous test but didn't see that it was done with OSA. So basically even with OSA or SH Panda failed miserably, which is disappointing but not surprising.
 

Brie

Level 10
Verified
Well-known
Jan 1, 2018
488
i was advised to use syshardener instead of osarmor on this site because syshardener is easier for beginners, like me. :giggle:

thank you for this test.
 
  • Like
Reactions: harlan4096

imuade

Level 12
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Jul 29, 2018
566
so called "double layer protection" :D
View attachment 207666
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
Yeah, I basically use Panda only to get the green mark on Windows Security Center tray icon ;)
  • K9 web protection helps in avoiding risky websites (from where you get 90% of problems)
  • Panda covers old malware
  • H_C takes care of zero-days
  • SysHardener reduces the attack surface
 

About us

  • MalwareTips is a community-driven platform providing the latest information and resources on malware and cyber threats. Our team of experienced professionals and passionate volunteers work to keep the internet safe and secure. We provide accurate, up-to-date information and strive to build a strong and supportive community dedicated to cybersecurity.

User Menu

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook or Twitter to know first about the latest cybersecurity incidents and malware threats.

Top