Madshrimps Forum Madness

Madshrimps Forum Madness (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)
-   WebNews (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/)
-   -   Malware vs Virus Scanners: 12 passed, 13 failed (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/malware-vs-virus-scanners-12-passed-13-failed-66051/)

jmke 4th September 2009 15:22

Malware vs Virus Scanners: 12 passed, 13 failed
 
We are happy to announce the results of our latest test, Project#20. Project#20 is first in line of our RWS (real world scenario) tests, in this particular one we used 60 pieces of malware which were collected from infected machines (US, EUROPE, ASIA), we used those samples to test real time blocking capabilities of 25 security applications.

The goal of this test is to block all 60 samples of malware from running and infecting the system, all applications that manage to block all the samples will receive MRG System Protected Award.


http://malwareresearchgroup.com/?page_id=2

jmke 4th September 2009 15:25

Most popular AVAST and AVG fail; :(

wutske 4th September 2009 17:29

For this test yes, but it'll probably pass if another set of malware was used.
60 samples isn't much, considering the amount of virusses that are in the running nowadays.

jmke 4th September 2009 17:38

one passing is enough to set havoc and allow for others to pass; 0 is the ONLY valid score here.

wutske 4th September 2009 17:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmke (Post 243593)
one passing is enough to set havoc and allow for others to pass; 0 is the ONLY valid score here.

What I mean is that the scanners that pass this test will probably fail when another set of malware is used.

jmke 4th September 2009 18:55

most likely, yes, none are 100% secure. But widely available malware not being picked up by this popular free scanners is quite an oversight;)

nocutius 5th September 2009 08:43

i can't believe that avg and avast could really be better than bitdefender overall.

Kougar 5th September 2009 14:58

I had a simple text file with a few names/addresses of online AV scanners that I gave to people that needed it. Bitdefender thought it was a host file attack and would always delete it when I tried to view it... really stupid. AVG and Avast both detected false positives in Folding@home data files, so my opinion of all three is pretty far south.

I've seen Panda fail quite a few past AV tests from security companies, so I'm really surprised it survived this one. Will have to see if that turns into a trend...

wutske 5th September 2009 16:27

I'm still happy with Avast, combined with Comodo firewall, Opera, a nicely filled hosts file and a well fed common sense I feel very safe on the internet, even tough avast is known to miss some viruses here and there.
http://www.av-comparatives.org/compa...ews/main-tests


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:06.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO