![[correlate]](/data/avatars/m/79/79653.jpg?1556985072){kind=avatar}
- May 4, 2019
- 825
WiseVector StopX vs Ransomware
- Thread starter [correlate]
- Start date
It is advised to take all reviews with a grain of salt. In extreme cases some reviews use dramatization for entertainment purposes.
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,513
It is a nice video. Here are some other videos made by the same author.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbjRDDLzQ6jLYBrU0BPGbrA
We can see that these videos are not made at the same time and not against the same samples. So the results of a few such tests cannot be compared. If we saw 100 similar tests in one month (with some other AVs), then we probably could say something more about the effectiveness of tested AVs (assuming that the author chose random samples).
The problem with such videos is that after the test we still cannot know if the result is good or bad. Even if we assume that these are fresh in-the-wild samples, there is no reference to other well known anti-ransomware programs (via tests on the same samples at the same time). So, we do not know if most AVs could block all tested samples or none.
This video only proves that the tested AV is not 100% effective. But, we knew it already about every security software.
Anyway, If one could see all MT videos about AV tests from the last year, then probably could also say which solutions are good and which are bad.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbjRDDLzQ6jLYBrU0BPGbrA
We can see that these videos are not made at the same time and not against the same samples. So the results of a few such tests cannot be compared. If we saw 100 similar tests in one month (with some other AVs), then we probably could say something more about the effectiveness of tested AVs (assuming that the author chose random samples).
The problem with such videos is that after the test we still cannot know if the result is good or bad. Even if we assume that these are fresh in-the-wild samples, there is no reference to other well known anti-ransomware programs (via tests on the same samples at the same time). So, we do not know if most AVs could block all tested samples or none.
This video only proves that the tested AV is not 100% effective. But, we knew it already about every security software.
Anyway, If one could see all MT videos about AV tests from the last year, then probably could also say which solutions are good and which are bad.
Last edited:
- May 4, 2019
- 825
The owner of those channel has been publishing for some time tests of samples of ransom programs I think he chooses, but followers sometimes ask him to include programs under testIt is a nice video. Here are some other videos made by the same author.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbjRDDLzQ6jLYBrU0BPGbrA
We can see that these videos are not made at the same time and not against the same samples. So the results of a few such tests cannot be compared. If we saw 100 similar tests in one month (with some other AVs), then we probably could say something more about the effectiveness of tested AVs (assuming that the author chose random samples).
The problem with such videos is that after the test we still cannot know if the result is good or bad. Even if we assume that these are fresh in-the-wild samples, there is no reference to other well known anti-ransomware programs (via tests on the same samples at the same time). So, we do not know if most AVs could block all tested samples or none.
This video only proves that the tested AV is not 100% effective. But, we knew it already about every security software.
Anyway, If one could see all MT videos about AV tests from the last year, then probably could also say which solutions are good and which are bad.
But we have not reached an effective way in determining which of the protection programs is most effective remains the individual is contributing to the protection of the computer because the infection is sometimes caused by human errors download files or programs improper.
Thanks my friend Andy Ful
Last edited:
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,513
It is possible that these tests are made in good faith. A few such tests mean (close to) nothing, but many random tests can aggregate to something interesting. This is similar to "wisdom of the crowd".
- May 29, 2018
- 2,728
That juan diaz guy is removing comments manually, check video of voodooshield by him
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClRuwvUk9-KcJwkOQx0PTvg
VoodooShield
So Juan, are you going to explain to the viewers the sleight of hand that you pulled? Encoder.exe is not even real malware... it does not even have a ransom note. The next time you test, please make sure to use real malware. Also, why are you deleting comments???
as @Andy Ful said , i rather trust malware hub results than youtube videos made now and then,,
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClRuwvUk9-KcJwkOQx0PTvg
VoodooShield
So Juan, are you going to explain to the viewers the sleight of hand that you pulled? Encoder.exe is not even real malware... it does not even have a ransom note. The next time you test, please make sure to use real malware. Also, why are you deleting comments???
as @Andy Ful said , i rather trust malware hub results than youtube videos made now and then,,
- Dec 14, 2018
- 643
Hello~
I have the same opinion as @Andy Ful. I don't know how many samples the author have tried and finally he found the sample that WiseVector seems detected but not blocked. I have watched other AV VS Ransomware videos by the same author and the process are similar: the final sample always cannot be blocked.
I have the same opinion as @Andy Ful. I don't know how many samples the author have tried and finally he found the sample that WiseVector seems detected but not blocked. I have watched other AV VS Ransomware videos by the same author and the process are similar: the final sample always cannot be blocked.
Similar threads
