Real-World Protection Test February 2018

Av Gurus

Level 29
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Malware Hunter
Well-known
Sep 22, 2014
1,767

Mahesh Sudula

Level 17
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Sep 3, 2017
818
I do not trust most of these tests, but really VB is as close as it gets to reality, and pretty much like the results of our test in MH, just look at Panda's history in VB (photo), different from AV-Comparatives, which almost always 100% for them.
View attachment 182495
Why don't we have other vendors in VB list who are listed as top performers by AV-C :notworthy: (For years)- McAfee Avira ...one thing that question me is why ESET doesn't take part in RAP tests by Virus Bulletin ? He gets VB certify for no Fp's ok acceptable...but no RAP test!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Faybert

Tsiehshi

Level 2
Verified
Nov 11, 2017
51
Funny that the 2 users lobbying for VB (regardless of AVC's quality or lack thereof) have the same favorite AV that ONLY performs particularly well on VB. According to you, companies pay AVC to get their AVs tested, and whoever pays more gets better results, but you refuse to use the same logic for VB, which is also a paid test as @Lockdown said. o_O
 

mekelek

Level 28
Verified
Well-known
Feb 24, 2017
1,661
Funny that the 2 users lobbying for VB (regardless of AVC's quality or lack thereof) have the same favorite AV that ONLY performs particularly well on VB. According to you, companies pay AVC to get their AVs tested, and whoever pays more gets better results, but you refuse to use the same logic for VB, which is also a paid test as @Lockdown said. o_O
if you're pointing at GData users, link me an other test where GData is tested.
we don't lobby for any tests, they're all bs, and shouldn't be taken seriously, but when some test has Panda on 100% for centuries, you start questioning it.
VB's tests seem to be on par with our personal experiences, not like the other tests.
 

Mahesh Sudula

Level 17
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Sep 3, 2017
818
Funny that the 2 users lobbying for VB (regardless of AVC's quality or lack thereof) have the same favorite AV that ONLY performs particularly well on VB. According to you, companies pay AVC to get their AVs tested, and whoever pays more gets better results, but you refuse to use the same logic for VB, which is also a paid test as @Lockdown said. o_O
First hir
Funny that the 2 users lobbying for VB (regardless of AVC's quality or lack thereof) have the same favorite AV that ONLY performs particularly well on VB. According to you, companies pay AVC to get their AVs tested, and whoever pays more gets better results, but you refuse to use the same logic for VB, which is also a paid test as @Lockdown said. o_O
Every test is a paid similar to how we pay for av suites...but the thing is VB guys atleast don't rest while tests go on..and their results have 90% genuinity with MT hub results as well..tests are not static but also dynamic (RAP)...Even mrg effitas is paid test...If an AV has an ability it would easily clear any of these tests...Few vendors that Av-C host as TOP literally don even a single RAP certify from VB...That gives the ans and I think no need to specify their names;)
 

Mahesh Sudula

Level 17
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Sep 3, 2017
818
First hir

Every test is a paid similar to how we pay for av suites...but the thing is VB guys atleast don't rest while tests go on..and their results have 90% genuinity with MT hub results as well..tests are not static but also dynamic (RAP)...Even mrg effitas is paid test...If an AV has an ability it would easily clear any of these tests...Few vendors that Av-C host as TOP literally don even have a single RAP certify from VB...That gives the ans and I think no need to specify their names;)
 

amico81

Level 21
Thread author
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Jan 10, 2017
1,061
Funny that the 2 users lobbying for VB (regardless of AVC's quality or lack thereof) have the same favorite AV that ONLY performs particularly well on VB. According to you, companies pay AVC to get their AVs tested, and whoever pays more gets better results, but you refuse to use the same logic for VB, which is also a paid test as @Lockdown said. o_O

you should take a close look @ the results of our malwarehub. then you will see the truth :alien:
thats one reason why I love this forum. here are not the agressive fanboys...but we all can talk on a high level of knowledge
 

Av Gurus

Level 29
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Malware Hunter
Well-known
Sep 22, 2014
1,767
What that "partnership" means?
 
D

Deleted member 65228

Every test is a paid similar to how we pay for av suites...but the thing is VB guys atleast don't rest while tests go on..and their results have 90% genuinity with MT hub results as well..tests are not static but also dynamic (RAP)...Even mrg effitas is paid test...If an AV has an ability it would easily clear any of these tests...Few vendors that Av-C host as TOP literally don even a single RAP certify from VB...That gives the ans and I think no need to specify their names;)
Please I am begging you, can you at-least write a proper sentence so I can read what you are saying properly. You don't have to put "..." in between every single sentence you write 24/7, it's difficult to follow what you are saying when you do this. No hostility here, but without all the constant "..." your posts may be read and interpreted more towards your aim, to prevent misunderstandings/confusion.

Funny that the 2 users lobbying for VB (regardless of AVC's quality or lack thereof) have the same favorite AV that ONLY performs particularly well on VB. According to you, companies pay AVC to get their AVs tested, and whoever pays more gets better results, but you refuse to use the same logic for VB, which is also a paid test as @Lockdown said. o_O
I don't know about AV-Comparatives but VirusBulletin actually test for free (or have for people I speak with), but only charge for tests to be published publicly. I specifically asked someone I knew the other day about this and they told me that VirusBulletin tested their product for them for free and provided feedback to help them, no charges unless public publishing was wanted.

I don't agree with the opinion of people saying that vendors pay more for better test results though, that would be stupid and if it was true, not as many vendors would participate in it. AV-Comparatives cost money because that is their JOB, their employees need to be paid somehow... Not because they are bribed to fake results.

Whether the testing methodology is good or bad or whether test results match those in a custom malware hub or personal testing is another matter. AV-C test with whatever their methodology is and show the results back on vendors which participated... That is it. They don't tell you that the detection rates in their testing will always be for the real-world, this is impossible because detection varies on a daily basis and depends on numerous factors (e.g. samples tested with, origin of the samples, age of the samples, behavior of the samples, etc.). It even says on their PDFs to take it with a grain of salt AFAIK.

God damn it's just a test why does there have to be so much fuss over it. It's like one testing vendor does more or less the same thing and it's all okay, another does it and they get shredded to bits. Who cares? Don't like it then don't care for it!

You can spend months testing a single product with a variety of techniques. A week later it could become obsolete and meaningless depending on how the malware market has since evolved and updates to the code-base in the security software package to adapt to prevalent threats... Signature database cleaning, BB logic changes, network rules, etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ink

Administrator
Verified
Staff Member
Well-known
Jan 8, 2011
22,361
God damn it's just a test why does there have to be so much fuss over it.
All the fanboys and haters love trolling over these results. It happens on EVERY single AV Comparison Test results by AVC/AVT/MRG etc. - ever posted here and other forums and social media.

It's a good reason to not comment on these types of topics.
 

low L!fe

Level 7
Verified
Well-known
Oct 11, 2014
317
Microsoft supported by Microsoft Co
The results of each period change
I will use Bitdefender Internet Security 2018
If I thought about moving I would choose GDATA Internet Security 2018
 
  • Like
Reactions: amico81

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