- May 17, 2020
- 41
Leo from The PC Security Channel "emulates ransomware" with behavioural tests by Avast as defense.
No proof of that. The reliable tests strongly suggest that the difference in protection between Avast, AVG, and Defender is too small and cannot be even measured.Avast Free (is very underrated, but I prefer AVG) > WD (Not tweaked)
The more sources I used, the smaller were the differences between top AVs. For example:I would argue that anybody who uses basic internet hygiene and caution could use MS Defender at default with an admin account and probably never have a problem. Too much emphasis is put on the AV. Most infections are the result of user ignorance, willful or not. Andy’s statistical analysis tends to show the risk would be similar regardless.
Actually, Leo knows what he is talking about. The problem is peoples' interpretations of and reactions to Leo.Leo is not entirely wrong about Defender free (default settings).
Actually, Leo knows what he is talking about. The problem is peoples' interpretations of and reactions to Leo.
He is a member of the Youtube tester community with the same test methods and mentality as other Youtube testers. He actually does know how to test much better, but that is not how he is going to do it.He has got some extended knowledge about malware, but apparently does not know much about reliable testing.
His comments are somewhat misguiding in convincing people that his tests can be more than an interesting demonstration.
Do you have mind reading capabilities?He actually does know how to test much better, but that is not how he is going to do it.
Actually, Leo knows what he is talking about. The problem is peoples' interpretations of and reactions to Leo.
Leo is a very well established professional. Without having here to explain himself, just based upon appearances I don't think he cares to put a lot of effort into his Youtube testing - which makes him no different than other Youtube testers.You're defending him when a few months ago you were bashing the "YouTube testers"?
Curious.... curious....![]()
No, but I've had multiple dealings with Leo. So I do know what he thinks about quite a few things. Besides, he spells out a lot in-detail in his videos. You have to just pay attention to what he actually saying, as opposed to what you think he is saying.Do you have mind reading capabilities?![]()
Yeah I totally agree with you on this one. Leo does know how to test antivirus. In fact he's the one and only tester I've seen who disabled the real-time protection of ESET and tested some ransomware to find if the other modules block it. The whole world knows that all the components of ESET are tied to each other and ESET does not have a behaviour blocker but still he tests like this. Why can't you just shut up instead of spamming all the posts? And just a few days ago you were bashing the YouTube testers. You should seek the help of a psychiatrist my friend.He is a member of the Youtube tester community with the same test methods and mentality as other Youtube testers. He actually does know how to test much better, but that is not how he is going to do it.
I doubt if Leo cares what people think of his testing nor his experience-based comments. Based upon what I see, he is perfectly fine with the way he does things. It is difficult to find fault whenever his most ardent opponents are on the other side of the spectrum - they are fanboys and don't like what Leo says about their beloved software.
Leo is a very well established professional. Without having here to explain himself, just based upon appearances I don't think he cares to put a lot of effort into his Youtube testing - which makes him no different than other Youtube testers.
Leo is not a professional tester, just like you.
Leo does a good job and understands malware, but doesn’t always take the time to understand the components of the tested AVs he’s not as familiar with.Leo said MD detected the ransomware using behavioral detection. But the detection name that is given by MD is signature-based, I suppose.