Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Andy Ful" data-source="post: 917503" data-attributes="member: 32260">
<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">From time to time any AV can sporadically miss many samples. That is obvious when one chooses several thousands of samples (about 0.1% of samples in the wild) from several millions of samples.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">In the year 2020 Trend Micro had the lowest false-positives rate among all AVs (and missed many samples). In the year 2019, the false-positives rate was the worst (and the protection was among the best).</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">If Trend Micro has got the top web-protection then the customers could be protected if the missed samples were web-originated in the wild. Other AVs (with worse web-protection) could be bypassed in 0-day in the wild, and when tested by AV-Comparatives in Malware Protection test, these samples could be already detected by signatures.</li>
</ol>The test results cannot be easily translated to the AV protection in the wild.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Andy Ful, post: 917503, member: 32260"] [LIST=1] [*]From time to time any AV can sporadically miss many samples. That is obvious when one chooses several thousands of samples ([B]about 0.1% of samples in the wild[/B]) from several millions of samples. [*]In the year 2020 Trend Micro had the lowest false-positives rate among all AVs (and missed many samples). In the year 2019, the false-positives rate was the worst (and the protection was among the best). [*]If Trend Micro has got the top web-protection then the customers could be protected if the missed samples were web-originated in the wild. Other AVs (with worse web-protection) could be bypassed in 0-day in the wild, and when tested by AV-Comparatives in Malware Protection test, these samples could be already detected by signatures. [/LIST] The test results cannot be easily translated to the AV protection in the wild. [/QUOTE]

Verification