AV-TEST Windows 10: December 2019

[catjc]

Test antivirus software for Windows 10 - December 2024

The current tests of antivirus software for Windows 10 from December 2024 of AV-TEST, the leading international and independent service provider for antivirus software and malware.

www.av-test.org

 

[Eggnog]

Glad to see Windows Defender doing well.

 

[RoboMan]

I don't like AV TEST testing results input. The way they show protection rates is so messy.

You have two products:

• Kaspersky
• Avast

You clearly have a top class suite vs a decent suite than if well configured can perform "well".

I see that one has a score of 6/6, and the other one has a score of 5.5/6 and I myself, an average Joe, will believe they're both as good. And they have an universe in between.

 

[ForgottenSeer 823865]

Anyway, any security forums member shouldn't need any AV other than WD, they are supposed to have enough skills & knowledge to avoid "ordinary" malware which should be caught by WD. What they need is tools for the sophisticated one (in case of).

 

[bribon77]

What I see, is that, these tests that these companies do, is something like the politics.
They swim but they don't get wet. that is, there is no bad AV.

 

[ForgottenSeer 823865]

dependent upon the test, 5 stars could be a completely worthless rating
but don't tell fanbois that, their ignorance is bliss
lmao

The worst is that some of them , will go nuclear in a debate between 2 products for a 0.5% difference. which is less than 1 malware difference . LOL

 

[EndangeredPootis]

And why has no one taken notice of the fact that Totalav, which is one of the scam products owned by the scammer group Protected.net, is here?

 

[roger_m]

And why has no one taken notice of the fact that Totalav, which is one of the scam products owned by the scammer group Protected.net, is here?

I didn't spend long enough looking at the test to notice. If the results weren't meaningless I would have looked more closely.

 

[EndangeredPootis]

I didn't spend long enough looking at the test to notice. If the results weren't meaningless I would have looked more closely.

I created a post on bleepingcomputer explaining further Vbulletin and AV-test are being endorsed by a scammer group - General Security

 

[roger_m]

I created a post on bleepingcomputer explaining further Vbulletin and AV-test are being endorsed by a scammer group - General Security

I didn't know that they produce malware as is stated in the Reddit post, but it certainly does not surprise me.

 

[ForgottenSeer 823865]

I created a post on bleepingcomputer explaining further Vbulletin and AV-test are being endorsed by a scammer group - General Security

The last line of your post is the reality of the AV relationship with Test Labs: Money.

I keep saying to not trust Test Labs here since a decade.

 

[RKRN3]

I created a post on bleepingcomputer explaining further Vbulletin and AV-test are being endorsed by a scammer group - General Security

Why do eye-opening posts in Reddit get closed down?

 

[XLR8R]

Why do eye-opening posts in Reddit get closed down?

Because big companies have resources for legal measures, small companies do not.

There's a certain very well-known product (not Avast), for example, which is widely discussed in security forums (including MalwareTips), has a good number of customers and links to certain shady activities by certain individuals in top/high positions. It's not the first time, and it would not be the last.

 

[polishpatriot]

I created a post on bleepingcomputer explaining further Vbulletin and AV-test are being endorsed by a scammer group - General Security

They are participating - which is completely valid as long as they pay the test fee. That is not the same as "endorsing." Just because those companies participate has nothing to do with the AV labs scamming anyone.

VBulletin and AV-Test are not scam labs. They perform a certain set of tests, with a certain methodology, for a fee. It's paid testing.

Lots of things being said about AV test labs, lots of it baseless and ridiculous. Everyone runs their mouth on forums, yet no one steps forward and disproves the test methodology... which, I might add, is an exercise in futility. The labs don't always get it right. However, it takes someone with experience such as Fabian Wosar to point the issues out.

 

[EndangeredPootis]

They are participating - which is completely valid as long as they pay the test fee. That is not the same as "endorsing." Just because those companies participate has nothing to do with the AV labs scamming anyone.

VBulletin and AV-Test are not scam labs. They perform a certain set of tests, with a certain methodology, for a fee. It's paid testing.

Lots of things being said about AV test labs, lots of it baseless and ridiculous. Everyone runs their mouth on forums, yet no one steps forward and disproves the test methodology... which, I might add, is an exercise in futility. The labs don't always get it right. However, it takes someone with experience such as Fabian Wosar to point the issues out.

But it makes no sense, heres these newcomers and those over at vb and av-test doesnt do a background check first? av-test "tested" all of their 3 scam products, totalav, pcprotect and scanguard, all of which have the same user interface, didnt that raise a red flag for av test? and I never mentioned those test sites scamming you, its protected.nets products that are, they have long been known for charging money for their products even after customers have cancelled their subscription.

 

[polishpatriot]

But it makes no sense, heres these newcomers and those over at vb and av-test doesnt do a background check first? av-test "tested" all of their 3 scam products, totalav, pcprotect and scanguard, all of which have the same user interface, didnt that raise a red flag for av test? and I never mentioned those test sites scamming you, its protected.nets products that are, they have long been known for charging money for their products even after customers have cancelled their subscription.

There are minimum requirements for a vendor to be eligible for a test, but there is no background check. It is not an AV lab's job to tell whether or not a software or the publisher is a scammer.

The mission of AV labs is not consumer protection. That is the mission of governmental agencies.

 

[EndangeredPootis]

There are minimum requirements, but there is no background check. It is not an AV lab's job to tell whether or not a software or the publisher is a scammer.

I guess youre right, but it will always make me angry knowing these guys can get away with this kind of stuff.

 

[polishpatriot]

I guess youre right, but it will always make me angry knowing these guys can get away with this kind of stuff.

Scammers are a huge problem. PUAs, PUPs, questionable security softs, even malware and so on are all about making money.

 

[XLR8R]

I guess youre right, but it will always make me angry knowing these guys can get away with this kind of stuff.

When AV-Test, AV-Comparatives, etc. was new, they had a principle that what is not a bonafide security company shall not be allowed to be tested.

Nowadays, these testing labs are themselves corporations and need to fees/money to survive.