Hot Take [Updated 29/12/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

[Evjl's Rain]

Comparison between browser extensions

Test 29/12
Q&A - [Updated 29/12/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 24/11
Q&A - [Updated 24/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 12/11
Q&A - [Updated 12/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 7/11
Q&A - [Updated 7/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 6/9
Q&A - [Updated 3/9/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 3/9
Q&A - [Updated 3/9/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 2/9
Q&A - [Updated 25/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test, quick 1/9
Q&A - [Updated 25/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Fun test 25/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 24/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 24/7/2018 (most comprehensive, as possible)
Q&A - [Updated 24/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 19/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 10/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 18/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 10/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 10/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 10/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 7/6/2018
Q&A - [Updated 7/6/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 3/6/2018
Q&A - [Updated 3/6/18] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 25/4/2018
Poll - [Updated 25/4/18] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Update: 23/3/2018
Poll - [Updated 23/3/18] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings


Browser: Google Chrome 65 x64
Malware and phishing links: 10 malc0de, 10 vxvault, 10 openphish, 10 verified phishtank, 10 unverified phishtank
Total: 50 links

Spoiler: Links

Dropbox - link test 17-3-2018.txt

Extensions: recently downloaded from Chrome Web Store
- Google Safe Browsing (built-in chrome's protection)
- AdGuard AdBlocker: default settings, uses Google Safe Browsing (delayed) and their own database
- Avira browser safety: default settings
- Norton Safe Web: default settings
- Bitdefender Trafficlight: default settings, it rarely blocks any malware links, just old ones
- Avast Online Security: default settings, only has phishing protection, expected to score 0 against malwares
- Netcraft Extension: default settings, only has phishing protection, expected to score 0 against malwares
- uBlock Origin with some additional filters

Spoiler: ublock origin filters

http://hosts-file.net/emd.txt
http://hosts-file.net/exp.txt
http://hosts-file.net/pup.txt
http://hosts-file.net/psh.txt
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/hosts
https://ransomwaretracker.abuse.ch/downloads/RW_DOMBL.txt
https://ransomwaretracker.abuse.ch/downloads/RW_IPBL.txt
https://ransomwaretracker.abuse.ch/downloads/RW_URLBL.txt

NOTE: the result can vary from day-to-day. Tomorrow with different links, the result can be very different. All are live links but they can be dead a few minutes after the test. No duplication

Results:

Winner: Google Safe Browsing

 

[LDogg]

I tried a few phishing sites and malware sites. The extension is weak

Sounds like nothing much has changed since it's release by Comodo then, Stefanos?

~LDogg

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

@Evjl's Rain Do you have time for an update ? Would be appreciated

 

[Nestor]

@Evjl's Rain Do you have time for an update ? Would be appreciated

speaking, where is @Evjl's Rain ??

 

[stefanos]

Sounds like nothing much has changed since it's release by Comodo then, Stefanos?

~LDogg

slightly better than before. But it remains weak

 

[LDogg]

slightly better than before. But it remains weak

You able to provide any screenshots of some tests just to have a thesis on it's current state?

~LDogg

 

[stefanos]

You able to provide any screenshots of some tests just to have a thesis on it's current state?

~LDogg

 

[stefanos]

Avast this time is very strong against malware sites and especialy on phishing sites

 

[LDogg]

Avast this time is very strong against malware sites and especialy on phishing sites

Seems like Comodo hasn't improved greatly from it's last release. I'll be sticking with Emsisoft still, their malware and phishing detection is great.

~LDogg

 

[stefanos]

Seems like Comodo hasn't improved greatly from it's last release. I'll be sticking with Emsisoft still, their malware and phishing detection is great.

~LDogg

Good choice. Comodo extension still weak like the signatures. But Avast against phishing is more better from emsisoft .

 

[LDogg]

Good choice. Comodo extension still weak like the signatures

Comodo's not set on detecting threats with Signatures, I do not think that's their route they wish to take going forward, but the web extension could do with a better back end detection mechanism.

~LDogg

 

[bribon77]

I did some tests with Emsisoft and I really liked the one I'm using.

 

[stefanos]

Comodo's not set on detecting threats with Signatures, I do not think that's their route they wish to take going forward, but the web extension could do with a better back end detection mechanism.

~LDogg

I think that in this company Comodo the staff are lazy, for that they discovered the auto sanbox

 

[LDogg]

I did some tests with Emsisoft and I really liked the one I'm using.

It's a fab extension to have. I did some tests myself as well a while back, I was comparing McAfee & BD against Emsisoft, I wonder who came out on top

~LDogg

 

[LDogg]

I think that in this company Comodo the staff are lazy, for that they discovered the auto sanbox

I think many companies sometimes focus on one thing and that's the aspect they focus on most. Then other functions become weakened due to this ideology. I think this is what happened with Comodo. They have fantastic products nonetheless however, their Firewall is second to none, shame about the extension though.

~LDogg

 

[Evjl's Rain]

I'm here
I would conclude that Comodo extension is not good. Don't use it.
It will slow down your browsing speed when comodo server is overloaded or your internet is slow to connect to comodo
it's very slow to react to new URLs. It's like vxvault's database fetching service because it's likely to block all vxvault links after 1-2 days. Besides vxvault, comodo is absolutely unreliable

The only extensions I can recommend for all users considering the balance between speed and detection rate (not necessarily the best): Windows defender browser protection and emsisoft

if you don't mind about resource usage and FPs, use Malwarebytes extension (best)
if you are extra worried about phishings or XSS attack, add nercraft

 

[oldschool]

The only extensions I can recommend for all users considering the balance between speed and detection rate (not necessarily the best): Windows defender browser protection and emsisoft

if you don't mind about resource usage and FPs, use Malwarebytes extension (best)

Anyone that follows this thread should know these are your current picks! These are the ones I trust the most.

 

[Burrito]

I'm here

Ok good, I'm glad you're here. You are a pillar of MT.

I wondered if you and @cruelsister had eloped or something.... as you both 'vanished' about the same time.

 

[LDogg]

Ok good, I'm glad you're here. You are a pillar of MT.

I wondered if you and @cruelsister had eloped or something.... as you both 'vanished' about the same time.

Oooo a spicy conspiracy theory

~LDogg

 

[Moonhorse]

Comodo has cool ui, but blocking is indeed so bad

Malwarebytes + netcraft + av web filter( kaspersky for me ) best one for sure

For budget pc( very old laptops) its indeed time to swap from malwarebytes extension to windows defender browser protection or either emsisoft , if there are huge issues running browser

I am myself using trace and what surprises me it has some decent features

 

[Moonhorse]

VirusTotal

This phishing link been up for more than 12 hours, why isnt any engine detecting it? I have reported it to multiple vendors without answer