AV-Comparatives Real-World Protection Test July-October 2022

Disclaimer
  1. This test shows how an antivirus behaves with certain threats, in a specific environment and under certain conditions.
    We encourage you to compare these results with others and take informed decisions on what security products to use.
    Before buying an antivirus you should consider factors such as price, ease of use, compatibility, and support. Installing a free trial version allows an antivirus to be tested in everyday use before purchase.

SeriousHoax

Level 44
Thread author
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Mar 16, 2019
3,303
Malicious software poses an ever-increasing threat, not only due to the number of malware programs increasing, but also due to the nature of the threats. Infection vectors are changing from simple file-based methods to distribution via the Internet. Malware is increasingly focusing on users, e.g. by deceiving them into visiting infected web pages, installing rogue/malicious software or opening emails with malicious attachments. The scope of protection offered by antivirus programs is extended by the inclusion of e.g. URL-blockers, content filtering, cloud reputation systems, ML-based static and dynamic detections and user-friendly behavior-blockers. If these features are perfectly coordinated with the signature-based and heuristic detection, the protection provided against threats increases.

In this test, all protection features of the product can be used to prevent infection – not just signatures or heuristic file scanning. A suite can step in at any stage of the process – accessing the URL, downloading the file, formation of the file on the local hard drive, file access and file execution – to protect the PC. This means that the test achieves the most realistic way of determining how well the security product protects the PC. Because all of a suite’s components can be used to protect the PC, it is possible for a product to score well in the test by having e.g. very good behavioral protection, but a weak URL blocker. However, we would recommend that all parts of a product should be as effective as possible. It should be borne in mind that not all malware enters computer systems via the Internet, and that e.g. a URL blocker is ineffective against malware introduced to a PC via a USB flash drive or over the local area network.
1.png2.png3.png
Read the full report here:
 

SeriousHoax

Level 44
Thread author
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Mar 16, 2019
3,303
TotalAV, an PUP that just uses the Avira engine, gets 0 false positives, while Avira, gets 2...? Yeah sure buddy,
Avira Prime has priority in the cloud, which TotalAV probably doesn't have and might have caused this two extra false positive for Avira.
Also, why did they post ESET twice? ESET blocked 621, ESET blocked 619.
Typo. I'm surprised that they haven't fixed that yet. The first one would be TotalAV with 621 blocked and the bottom one should be ESET with 619.
 

brambedkar59

Level 24
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Apr 16, 2017
1,395
Looking at the graph I see 3% samples as user dependent for McAfee (which should place McAfee at the bottom of the table along with Trend Micro for having 42 FP) but I see nothing in the table, so either graph is wrong or the table??
 

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