Qihoo going Private

[cruelsister]

(I did a quick search to see if this has been already discussed and failed to find anything. But is I missed something, sincere apologies to the OP).

Last month Zhou Hongyi (the CEO of Qihoo) announced that he is forming a group to take Qihoo private for 9 billion USD. Note that currently is a publicly traded company on the New York Stock Exchange. The issue Zhou had was that Wall Street was looking at Qihoo as nothing but an Internet Advertising/Gaming company and totally dismissed the Security segment. This lead to issues as shareholders kept whining like the rabble that they are if R&D money was funneled into the Security segment that they were not equipped to understand.

(The taking private of a currently misunderstood company is not unknown in the Tech Industry. Seagate was taken private in 2000 only to return a few years later to much acclaim when Wall Street Analysts finally figured out what a Disk Drive was; Dell Computers was taken private by Michael Dell last year.)

However due to the recent general collapse of the Chinese Stock Market the buyout group may retract the current offer of $77 USD/share (QIHU trades today at around $60) and come back with a lower offer. But no matter what the final deal will be, expect Qihoo to be taken off the NYSE by at the latest the first quarter of 2016.

What this means for Security Geeks is that Zhou will be able to fulfill his vision of developing an excellent (for an AV) product by funneling more money into product development without the jackals of Wall Street questioning every move. In short, this buyout should be met with happiness by all the Qihoo AV fans out there.

 

[Rolo]

Now if Electronic Arts would do the same thing...

 

[jamescv7]

Qihoo's bind as advertised company makes the product to be powerful but yet taken for granted in terms of issues of product operation so with this move, it should pose really outcome.

Money can change everything whether good or bad.

 

[marg]

Quihoo makes the best free AV IMO.

 

[Nightwalker]

Very good indeed for Qihoo users, it is already a nice antivirus that will become only better with time.

 

[cruelsister]

Just an update on this Privatization bid- As I noted above right after the bid the Chinese Stock market really tanked (and continues to do so). I was expecting the bid (which was non-binding) to be withdrawn, but so far nothing official.

However it was just disclosed that Neil Shen (the CEO of Sequoia Capital and part of the group bidding to take Qihoo private) sold 180,000 shares (for over 8 million USD) shortly after the Privatization bid was announced (and at the start of the China Stock Tank). If the Group had any intention of proceeding with the current bid they would be buying and not selling, so as I expected it seems the current bid will be withdrawn and hopefully a new one will be in place in a month or two.

 

[Der.Reisende]

Quihoo makes the best free AV IMO.

Fully agree

 

[Sensor7]

Not so fast....
Chinese vendors Tencent and Qihoo have been accused of gaming antimalware tests by releasing optimized versions of their products for testing purposes that wouldn't be reflected in the real world, several antimalware firms said.

Both companies will be stripped of their rankings, AV‐Comparatives, AV-TEST and Virus Bulletin said. The three stripped the rankings of Qihoo last week, and of Tencent on Monday night."

Read the entire article at PCWorld:
Tencent, Qihoo antimalware firms are accused of cheating, stripped of rankings in antivirus tests

 

[Pat MacKnife]

Strange but Tencent is still on the test with AV-comparitifs .... How come ?

 

[Der.Reisende]

Not so fast....
Chinese vendors Tencent and Qihoo have been accused of gaming antimalware tests by releasing optimized versions of their products for testing purposes that wouldn't be reflected in the real world, several antimalware firms said.

Both companies will be stripped of their rankings, AV‐Comparatives, AV-TEST and Virus Bulletin said. The three stripped the rankings of Qihoo last week, and of Tencent on Monday night."

Read the entire article at PCWorld:
Tencent, Qihoo antimalware firms are accused of cheating, stripped of rankings in antivirus tests

Sure, but how come that Kaspersky has nearly 100% detection in File Detection Tests (http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/avc_fdt_201503_en.pdf), Real World Protection (AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Real World Protection Test Overview), but when you test it with live Malware Packs or even single Malware Files, the detection rate can be as low as 70-85%? It causes some uneasy gut feeling (paid results?!?). I did the same test as some users here with KIS 2015 (engine(s) fully updated etc., maxed out settings) last week for the first time with one Malware Pack, the detection rate was shocking low, and after 1 hour scanning my PC got frozen. That was the time I changed to Qihoo 360 TSE definitely, 2 laptops and 1 tower were equipped with Qihoo by that time for months (detection rate as well as performance is great, see my posts, scanned files with Qihoo 360 TSE on the named tower).

 

[jamescv7]

@Der.Reisende : There are few possibilities which how products like Kaspersky perform better compare from what we saw on our actual test.

1) Those samples may not considered as zero day unless mentioned on the methodology, sometimes these are already older from its release which detection are so easily to be identified.

2) Sources on which they commonly gathered are already been aware by those Antivirus.

The thing which may perhaps to be accurate is heuristics test however when dealing on user intervention its never became counted.

 

[Der.Reisende]

@Der.Reisende : There are few possibilities which how products like Kaspersky perform better compare from what we saw on our actual test.

1) Those samples may not considered as zero day unless mentioned on the methodology, sometimes these are already older from its release which detection are so easily to be identified.

2) Sources on which they commonly gathered are already been aware by those Antivirus.

The thing which may perhaps to be accurate is heuristics test however when dealing on user intervention its never became counted.

Hello Jamescv7, thank you, I got it
Though it's a pity if a non-paid product easily passes by the large AV vendors? Of course, detection is not all, but it can save you from getting infected. No worry after an infection with cleaning up, restoring files etc. (you cannot even know if your PC is safe again without fresh installation).

 

[jackuars]

@Der.Reisende : There are few possibilities which how products like Kaspersky perform better compare from what we saw on our actual test.

1) Those samples may not considered as zero day unless mentioned on the methodology, sometimes these are already older from its release which detection are so easily to be identified.

2) Sources on which they commonly gathered are already been aware by those Antivirus.

The thing which may perhaps to be accurate is heuristics test however when dealing on user intervention its never became counted.

Although I still wonder why Kaspersky and BitDefender, the two heaviest products on my system, seems to get perfect ratings (or close) at AV-Test and AV-Comparitives.

I understand products behave differently on different systems, but it seems to be the case for most of my contacts too.

 

[Der.Reisende]

Although I still wonder why Kaspersky and BitDefender, the two heaviest products on my system, seems to get perfect ratings (or close) at AV-Test and AV-Comparitives

+1 when it comes to BD