kamo_jisan

Level 1
Hello all members! Thank you for your access here.
Just a moment, would you use your time a little for solving my question?

There are some famous test for resarch of ability to protect devices by anti-malware softwares.
For example, AV-TEST and AV-Comparatives are the most famous test of the world.

Last week, I was looking the result of them, which tested anti-malware solutions to protect from malwares.
I have accessed to the result; AV-Comparatives's Protection Test and Real-World Protection Test, and AV-TEST results.

But I had a question about these showing.
According to Real-World Protection Test by AV-Comparatives, Bitdefender is better than Avast, and even Kaspersky. Even Microsoft is also better than them.
But according to Malware Protection Test by AV-Comparatives, Avast is better than Bitdefender. And the MS is not good.
And also that AV-TEST is showing the test result in February 2017. At the result, Avast Free, Bitdefender Internet Security, and F-Secure SAFE are rated as full point at Protection section.

So I want to ask everyone that which results shoud I trust?
And...

<Question No.1>

I am having some license; Bitdefender Total and F-Secure SAFE. And I am also ble to install Avast Free or Fortinet, SOPHOS, Avira Free.
Which software is it excellent for protect my PC from threat (From using Browsers, Email, and more)?
What do you think?

<Question No.2>
I think that Avast Free is very nice soft for many consumers like me because of light and high score protection.
But Bitdefender is rated as one of the best solution for keeping security of PC.
As saying before, which software is better for keeping security?

<Question No.3>

According to test result, Bitdefender Internet Security and Total Security are one of the best.
By the way, as saying before, I am having F-Secure SAFE license as trial of it.
If you choose security solution from these two softwares; Bitdefender Total or F-Secure SAFE, which will you choose?

<Question No.4>

Both software, Bitdefender and F-Secure are using Bitdefender Engine, and both are given high score at Protection ability.
I think that F-Secure is good for me because of light and high rate protection.
But it blocks many website as dangerous site based in false positives.
It is too inconvenience for me, so if I use F-Secure SAFE, I turn off Browsing Protection feature(Dangerous site are blocked by this feature. I will use Browsing Scan Feature without blocking site feature).
If I use F-secure SAFE without the feature of "Browsing Protection", Bitdefender Total (or Internet Security) is better than F-Secure SAFE for me?
Is the F-Secure SAFE's Browsing Protection feature indispensable for keeping PC security? I can not decide it.

My PC: Windows 10 Home/ Core i7/ 8GB RAM/ HDD Storage

By the way, I am not able to write English enogh correctly, so please tell me it if you can not understand my sentence.
I hope to your participation!
Thank you very much.
 

shmu26

Level 83
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
The malware testing here on MT is not biased by money. But it is heavily oriented toward zero-day malwares. Zero-days are what hit you in email attacks and phishing attacks.

Some users are smart enough not to open suspicious email attachments, and won't click on suspicious links. For them, the biggest threat is installing downloaded software.
IMHO, zero-day malware is not as prevalent in software downloads, so the big-name AV testers would give more relevant results regarding software download protection.
 

Game Of Thrones

Level 5
Verified
well with all respect to others opinions i mostly trust av-comparative. if you see their documentation and results it reflects real world performances that we see and the rewards that this lab got is more genuine and since they are based in Austria government have some control of what they are doing. here, is not a good indication of how good a software is, some samples are outdated and won't run in latest windows so when an app detects them it does not mean its good at real world . when an pack releases here every vendor can access them so they can add the signature faster than the others which sometimes makes this tests useless. testing in virtual machines is good but not with samples that everyone can access them, if you have your own samples then its good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and Fritz

lab34

Level 6
Hello,
I think that if a product has bad results in those AV-XXXX tests, it's a sign that there is a problem.
And if a product has good results, it deserves interest.
After that, we can cross those results with those of the malware hub and make our own opinion.
 

Winter Soldier

Level 25
well with all respect to others opinions i mostly trust av-comparative. if you see their documentation and results it reflects real world performances that we see and the rewards that this lab got is more genuine and since they are based in Austria government have some control of what they are doing. here, is not a good indication of how good a software is, some samples are outdated and won't run in latest windows so when an app detects them it does not mean its good at real world . when an pack releases here every vendor can access them so they can add the signature faster than the others which sometimes makes this tests useless. testing in virtual machines is good but not with samples that everyone can access them, if you have your own samples then its good.
I agree, AV Comparatives might be more reliable than others.
I often read the Hub results and the samples are very fresh, especially interesting is the dynamic analysis by running the malware not detected in static mode, here the signatures lose their importance in favor of behavioral technologies.
For example, Bitdefender is always to the top, according to AVC, AvTest, etc, but some Hub results speak differently, and these results are close to my thought.

Not saying BD is a bad product, indeed! But I find emblematic it is always 100% detection, or very close to it, according to testing labs.
 

BugCode

Level 10
Verified
Important order:
1: You
2: BackUp
3: Why not No-Av at all...?
4: One like mother second like daughter third like both, so... you will for sure find suitable av for your needs, as Sir Froggy mention and other gurus, a lot of information you find this site.
5: If you have already paid subs, so i like a way to use them or give someone if you don't like ones.

Oh well... other post of mine, no start and no end, just try and so on. Always/actually quite often you got better free av than you may have paid already subcription.

Wish you luck to Av hunting!

- BC

E: My english is also pretty bad, so try survive! And maybe order 3 & 4 & 5 could live with feelings...
 

_CyberGhosT_

Level 53
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
To put it simply do not trust either of them Looks through the forums here would be a better idea to make an opinion on a AV.:)
Exactly, apply the same advise as applies for reviews here at MT, a grain of salt.
I have found that if I am not too familiar with a product, both AVC & AVT are good
for accessory & feature listings. The rest of what they both offer is valid for just a
short time and rarely reflective or how consumers employ the actual software, but
does make for good reading. Just remember to do your own homework and stay
informed :)
 

monkeylove

Level 3
What I did was select the best ones listed for either site, search online to see which ones had no pop-up ads, and test them to see which one was lightest in my system. I ended up using the free version of Bitdefender. I did the same for other features such as firewalls and browser protection.

Finally, I installed free versions of offline antivirus and antimalware scanners and rescue disks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and lab34

jamescv7

Level 61
Verified
Trusted
I cannot comment either considering the fact both have different methodologies between AV-Comparatives and AV-Test.

The true essence of protection goes not only on the signatures and heuristics but the overall including the usage of Sandbox, HIPS or BB which why two independent testing organization does not count the user interaction pop-ups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and Fritz

Orion

Level 2
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and Fritz
D

Deleted member 178

Some points I have raised on wilders on AV-C real world testing that I thought Made sense:
Real-World Protection Test March 2017
check my reply there.

He raised some good points , see my opinon about tests there: Poll - My take on "what should be a real world test"

Real world test have only 328 samples....Too small for a day forget a month.
i disagree, too much , you will never encounter more than 10 malwares in your whole life unless you look for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo

Orion

Level 2
check my reply there.


He raised some good points , see my opinon about tests there: Poll - My take on "what should be a real world test"


i disagree, too much , you will never encounter more than 10 malwares in your whole life unless you look for them.
Well I was never a big fan of test The talk on the test cases(328 or whatever) was just to asset in relation to the amount of samples released everyday.

Someone on wilders is mad because I have queries on the methods :) People these days.....
 
D

Deleted member 178

Well I was never a big fan of test
Someone on wilders is mad because I have queries on the methods :) People these days.....
So do I , and yes some people are to "emotional" about security or privacy ...

Btw, i just realized you are TI :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo

Orion

Level 2
So do I , and yes some people are to "emotional" about security or privacy ...

Btw, i just realized you are TI :D
It's not that I don't consider their tests.Its still interesting to me.But I have serious queries on what they call as bypass.I am passionate towards the these subjects too but not emotional.

PS. You are not the first one to notice I am TI.Cruelsister did too on her YT tests.

Thanks,
True Indian(Orion)