Joined
Sep 1, 2018
Messages
103
OS
Windows 10
Antivirus
Avast
#23
But don't understand why the chart shows a red bar
They are two separate tests which is maybe why you are getting confused if i am correct.

The first chart with the red bit, relates to their Real World Protection Test, which is not the same test as the second chart with the percentages. That 1.5% of the bar which is red, relates to how much was compromised. So if you look at the factsheet on the website, 98.5% was blocked and 1.5% was compromised.

Then the second chart with the offline and online detection rates, relates to their Malware Protection Test, which is not the same test as i stated.
 
Last edited:

Lockdown

From AppGuard
Developer
Verified
Joined
Oct 24, 2016
Messages
4,186
#26
1. I am n00bs.

1.1 I needs to find an AV in less than 30 minutes.

1.2 I searches and find AV-Comparatives recent test. Perfect.

2. I looks at AV-Comparatives test results chart (everything else TL;DR... who reads nowadays ?). Pictures tells all.

3. I wants only 100 %.

4. I sees Microsoft Windows Defender 100 %.

5. I looks into it and sees it is free - it is already on Windows 10 ! Whoopee !

5.1 Everything else costs money. Are publishers out of their minds chargings me even a penny ?

5.2 If it's free, it's good enough for me.

6. I say to myself "Windows Defender" is sufficient; it meets my criteria - 100 % & free.

6.1 I am protected. Go plays games now and surfs pornos. Oh, and I forgots, needs search more games crackz and cheats.

:X3:

Above is AV test lab results typical use and outline of decision-making.
 
Last edited:

RoboMan

Level 24
Content Creator
Verified
Joined
Jun 24, 2016
Messages
1,380
OS
Windows 10
Antivirus
Bitdefender
#27
Sign this petition in change.org: burn AV-Comparatives offices

I actually did my quick little trick to check tests validity: grabbed three main vendors: ESET, Kaspersky, and Microsoft. Compared it. Microsoft scored highest. Closed and back to League of Legends.
 

davisd

Level 21
Verified
Joined
Feb 2, 2016
Messages
1,044
OS
Windows 10
Antivirus
Default-Deny
#29
If user interactions are requested by a product, we always choose “Allow” or equivalent. If the product protects the system anyway, we count the malware as blocked, even though we allow the program to run when the user is asked to make a decision.

We do not consider an outbound-firewall alert about a running malware process, which asks whether or not to block traffic from the users’ workstation to the Internet, to be protection.
Really pro independent AV testing organization. Don't dare to question their Default-allow testing methodology.
 
Last edited:

shmu26

Level 70
Content Creator
Verified
Joined
Jul 3, 2015
Messages
5,960
OS
Windows 10
#30
Actually, I bothered to read the methodology. "Working exploits" - whatever those are. I suppose they used a slightly out of date version of browsers, Office, Adobe... what have you.
They say their software is up to date: "Currently, we are running this test under Microsoft Windows 10 Pro RS4 64 Bit with up-to-date third-party software (such as Adobe Flash, Adobe Acrobat Reader, Java, etc.). "

I would guess that their definition of "working exploit" does not mean an unpatched vulnerability, but rather something more pedestrian like obfuscated VBS and Powershell .
 

shmu26

Level 70
Content Creator
Verified
Joined
Jul 3, 2015
Messages
5,960
OS
Windows 10
#33
Then they as well temporary disable all realtime AV protection mechanisms, that's what users do, right, no? Torrenting patch for their AV.. LOL.
True.
But the real noobs, the ones who don't know what a torrent is, and don't even know how to turn off their AV for a few minutes, they are the true target audience here IMHO.
 

oldschool

Level 15
Verified
Joined
Mar 29, 2018
Messages
710
OS
Windows 10
Antivirus
Cylance
#34
Common sense tells you to take any testing results, or reviews, with a huge grain of salt. I agree with @shmu26 that their testing method is targeted at or assume the careless user, thus the user-initiated decisions > infections. Why are people upset with the rankings, anyway? Who cares? Have some become the dreaded FanBoy? Anyway, I thought fanboys were celebrity stalkers. :sneaky:
 

Lockdown

From AppGuard
Developer
Verified
Joined
Oct 24, 2016
Messages
4,186
#36
Common sense tells you to take any testing results, or reviews, with a huge grain of salt. I agree with @shmu26 that their testing method is targeted at or assume the careless user, thus the user-initiated decisions > infections. Why are people upset with the rankings, anyway? Who cares? Have some become the dreaded FanBoy? Anyway, I thought fanboys were celebrity stalkers. :sneaky:
The funny thing is, most of the people who buy and use the soft don't care. It is the security soft geeks who seek perfection or whatever it is that drives their internals that have emotional meltdowns.

It's default allow. What does anyone expect ? The expectations, plus the mental and emotional involvement are I don't know what... there is something really disturbing about it all. That people react so strongly and carry on as they do on some of these threads... it is obvious that a whole bunch of maladaptive stuff is going on.

Some people will switch because there is only a 1 % or less difference between AV-Y and AV-Z.

Some people freak out because AV-Z fails - at Office exploits for example - but they don't even have Office installed on their system. Still they will dump the security soft "Just because... it must be flawed in other unknown, hidden ways" Wut ? That is ludicrous.

Some people cannot cope with the idea of inert malware on their system. Even worse is botched malware that runs, but does nothing. Some people have massive brain hemorrhages if an AV allows inert malware or malware that sits there and does nothing. Any security soft that allows such things... gotta switch immediately.

Some people are hurt when there beloved soft doesn't do so good. And with some, if there is a bypass or something is said that the person just doesn't like, oh... look out. Time for multi-cross-forum dramas.

I could go on for quite a long time here, but my finger tips would get too sore.
 
Last edited:

Lockdown

From AppGuard
Developer
Verified
Joined
Oct 24, 2016
Messages
4,186
#37
They say their software is up to date: "Currently, we are running this test under Microsoft Windows 10 Pro RS4 64 Bit with up-to-date third-party software (such as Adobe Flash, Adobe Acrobat Reader, Java, etc.). "

I would guess that their definition of "working exploit" does not mean an unpatched vulnerability, but rather something more pedestrian like obfuscated VBS and Powershell .
As you can see I care so little that I didn't even bother to read carefully. To me the details don't matter at this point.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Messages
46
OS
Windows 8.1
Antivirus
Kaspersky
#38
1. I am n00bs.

1.1 I needs to find an AV in less than 30 minutes.

1.2 I searches and find AV-Comparatives recent test. Perfect.

2. I looks at AV-Comparatives test results chart (everything else TL;DR... who reads nowadays ?). Pictures tells all.

3. I wants only 100 %.

4. I sees Microsoft Windows Defender 100 %.

5. I looks into it and sees it is free - it is already on Windows 10 ! Whoopee !

5.1 Everything else costs money. Are publishers out of their minds chargings me even a penny ?

5.2 If it's free, it's good enough for me.

6. I say to myself "Windows Defender" is sufficient; it meets my criteria - 100 % & free.

6.1 I am protected. Go plays games now and surfs pornos. Oh, and I forgots, needs search more games crackz and cheats.

:X3:

Above is AV test lab results typical use and outline of decision-making.
I love your socio-cultural studies of personal motivations when choosing an antivirus.

100% agree with you. I have seen myself reflected in your ironic vision and in truth no antivirus with 100% effectiveness has been able to protect my computer from me.
Sometimes the worst virus should be called userware
 

davisd

Level 21
Verified
Joined
Feb 2, 2016
Messages
1,044
OS
Windows 10
Antivirus
Default-Deny
#39
My AV is best, don't argue with me, I know better. I installed McAfee on top of Norton from cnet, because Rubenking said they both good. God damn I'm genius. Double protection, no bugs, no detections.
 
Last edited: