It appears you have not yet registered with our community. To register please click here...

 
Go Back [M] > Madshrimps > WebNews
Malware vs Virus Scanners: 12 passed, 13 failed Malware vs Virus Scanners: 12 passed, 13 failed
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Malware vs Virus Scanners: 12 passed, 13 failed
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 4th September 2009, 15:22   #1
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,699
jmke has disabled reputation
Default 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 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2009, 15:25   #2
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,699
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

Most popular AVAST and AVG fail;
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2009, 17:29   #3
wutske
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2009, 17:38   #4
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,699
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

one passing is enough to set havoc and allow for others to pass; 0 is the ONLY valid score here.
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2009, 17:53   #5
wutske
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke View Post
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.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2009, 18:55   #6
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,699
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

most likely, yes, none are 100% secure. But widely available malware not being picked up by this popular free scanners is quite an oversight
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2009, 08:43   #7
nocutius
 
Posts: n/a
Default

i can't believe that avg and avast could really be better than bitdefender overall.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2009, 14:58   #8
Kougar
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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...
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2009, 16:27   #9
wutske
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
9 Steps to Purge Your PC of Malware jmke WebNews 0 15th July 2010 16:39
Seven fail Virus Bulletin's first Windows 7 tests jmke WebNews 0 9th December 2009 09:07
MIT builds battery from bacterial virus, humans to power machines by 2012 jmke WebNews 0 3rd April 2009 10:05
Making malware unprofitable: economics key to slowing hackers down jmke WebNews 0 21st November 2007 10:07
Giving your passwords the finger: a review of fingerprint scanners jmke WebNews 0 25th June 2007 10:01
Bringing Malware to a new level - SpamThru Trojan Analysis jmke WebNews 0 25th October 2006 14:20
Intel Releases Pentium 4 with Dedicated Virus Coprocessor jmke WebNews 1 29th May 2005 09:49
Virus in your mails! jmke WebNews 2 23rd December 2004 21:52
worm virus !!! Gamer Hardware/Software Problems, Bugs 14 13th August 2003 19:36

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:08.


Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO