Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Security
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
The Fallacy of Professional AV Tests
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Snickers102" data-source="post: 750909" data-attributes="member: 73418"><p>Then the next chromebook will come around, and so on</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Perhaps appguard should step up their marketing, give em some fire Lockdown <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite125" alt=":LOL:" title="Laugh :LOL:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":LOL:" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Give up on AVs, break entire windows, worth?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So it's easier to just strip windows naked? <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite125" alt=":LOL:" title="Laugh :LOL:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":LOL:" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The point of the tests is to test which AV is the best, we all know that for old malware all the AVs can detect it, it's with zero-day malware where they struggle, otherwise there is little difference</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>People would whitelist at least some of the stuff, downloaded some image ending with .jpg.exe? "That's a legit image, stupid smart screen hahaha", whereas AV doesn't ask people "is this legit stuff or not?", it says "This stuff is bad" and user is like "Aah, good find, guess I'm not gonna open it". Ofc there's always the person that'll allow it anyway, but that's the outlier</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Statistically, the majority of malware attacks are from old malware (not counting phishing and stuff), not brand new zero-day or close-to-zero-day which the AV may not have picked up yet, so AVs makes sense for the average user. Besides, there are free AVs that are pretty good relative to some paid AVs</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That would assume AVs literally have a 0% detection rate on zero-day malware, which is not the case. It's not even that low, judging by the malware testing hub that we have here in MalwareTips. What you said implies as if zero-day protection is so bad that an AV is basically all about the signatures, and thus time-until-zero-day-malware-is-added-to-signatures is the only thing that matters in an AV, which is not the case I think. Also, your cyclist analogy is bad. Just because you can see how fast the other cyclist is (in this case in terms of kilowatts) doesn't mean you can input enough kilowatts to beat him. It's not like you suddenly become stronger by learning how much stronger the other cyclist is compared to you, you still have to train to obtain that strength</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Snickers102, post: 750909, member: 73418"] Then the next chromebook will come around, and so on Perhaps appguard should step up their marketing, give em some fire Lockdown :LOL: Give up on AVs, break entire windows, worth? So it's easier to just strip windows naked? :LOL: The point of the tests is to test which AV is the best, we all know that for old malware all the AVs can detect it, it's with zero-day malware where they struggle, otherwise there is little difference People would whitelist at least some of the stuff, downloaded some image ending with .jpg.exe? "That's a legit image, stupid smart screen hahaha", whereas AV doesn't ask people "is this legit stuff or not?", it says "This stuff is bad" and user is like "Aah, good find, guess I'm not gonna open it". Ofc there's always the person that'll allow it anyway, but that's the outlier Statistically, the majority of malware attacks are from old malware (not counting phishing and stuff), not brand new zero-day or close-to-zero-day which the AV may not have picked up yet, so AVs makes sense for the average user. Besides, there are free AVs that are pretty good relative to some paid AVs That would assume AVs literally have a 0% detection rate on zero-day malware, which is not the case. It's not even that low, judging by the malware testing hub that we have here in MalwareTips. What you said implies as if zero-day protection is so bad that an AV is basically all about the signatures, and thus time-until-zero-day-malware-is-added-to-signatures is the only thing that matters in an AV, which is not the case I think. Also, your cyclist analogy is bad. Just because you can see how fast the other cyclist is (in this case in terms of kilowatts) doesn't mean you can input enough kilowatts to beat him. It's not like you suddenly become stronger by learning how much stronger the other cyclist is compared to you, you still have to train to obtain that strength [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top