Anti-Virus Challenge

[Guest]

[don67]

Rank

1. G DATA 2008 version 18.2.7310.844 - 99.05%

2. F-Secure 2008 version 8.00.103 - 98.75%

3. TrustPort version 2.8.0.1835 - 98.06%

4. Kaspersky version 8.0.0.357 - 97.95%

5. eScan version 9.0.742.1 - 97.44%

6. The Shield 2008 - 97.43%

7. AntiVir version 8.1.00.331 Premium - 97.13%

8. Ashampoo version 1.61 - 97.09%

9. Ikarus version 1.0.82 - 96.05%

10. AntiVir version 8.1.00.295 Classic - 95.54%

11. AVG version 8.0.100 Free - 94.85%

12. BitDefender 2008 version 11.0.16 - 94.70%

13. Avast version 4.8.1201 Professional - 93.78%

14. Nod32 version 3.0.650.0 - 93.36%

15. F-Prot version 6.0.9.1 - 91.87%

16. BitDefender version 10 Free - 91.32%

17. ArcaVir 2008 - 88.65%

18. Norman version 5.92.08 - 87.72%

19. Vba32 version 3.12.6.6 - 87.21%

20. McAfee Enterpise version 8.5.0i - 86.57%

21. McAfee version 12.0.177 - 86.39%

22. Rising AV version 20.46.52 - 85.87%

23. Norton 2008 - 83.34%

24. Dr. Web version 4.44.5 - 82.87%

25. Antiy Ghostbusters version 5.2.3 - 80.23%

26. VirusBuster version 5.002.62 - 77.19%

27. Outpost version 6.0.2294.253.0490 - 75.35%

28. V3 Internet Security version 2008.05.31.00 - 75.23%

29. ViRobot Expert version 5.5 - 74.50%

30. Virus Chaser version 5.0a - 73.65%

31. A-squared Anti-Malware version 3.5 - 71.66%

32. PC Tools version 4.0.0.26 - 69.82%

33. Trend Micro Antivirus+Antispyware 2008 version 16.10.1079 - 67.28%

34. Iolo version 4.325 - 63.98%

34. Panda 2008 version 3.01.00 - 61.41%

36. Sophos Sweep version 7.3.2 - 54.71%

37. ClamWin version 0.93 - 54.68%

38. CA Anti-Virus version 9.00.170 - 51.08%

39. Quick Heal version 9.50 - 47.97%

40. Comodo version 2.0.17.58 - 43.15%

41. Trojan Hunter version 5.0.962 - 31.39%

42. Solo version 7.0 - 21.10%

43. Protector Plus version 8.0.C03 - 20.14%

44. PCClear version 1.0.8.0 - 19.63%

45. AntiTrojan Shield version 2.1.0.14 - 14.74%

46. Trojan Remover version 6.6.9 - 13.49%

47. VirIT version 6.2.94 - 8.63%

48. True Sword version 4.2 - 3.42%

49. Abacre έκδοση version 1.4 - 0.00%

http://www.virus.gr/portal/en/content/2008-06%2C-1-21-june

[JamesFrance]

I see you have put CAVS 2 in Red, so your point is?

[Liron Jan]

Rank

40. Comodo version 2.0.17.58 - 43.15%

You do know that CAVS 2 is beta. Don't be surprise. Wait for CAVS 3, I'm sure that it will get much better rank.

Liron Jan.

[don67]

I see you have put CAVS 2 in Red, so your point is?

my point is  ..................... i hope the next version C.I.S. is the top

[JamesFrance]

my point is  ..................... i hope the next version C.I.S. is the top

Oh that's good, me too.   Then we can all use it.

[Liron Jan]

my point is  ..................... i hope the next version C.I.S. is the top

Don't worry, I am sure CIS will be great product.

[tormod]

CAVS 2 is not only a beta, but also has not had any development in quite some, in order to focus on CAVS 3

[Goose19]

Please remember that these "Results" might not always be right..... I've seen AVG have 98% detection and then 89% and the same with a few others. I know each virus "test" is different but personally I do not trust any of them.

[don67]

Please remember that these "Results" might not always be right..... I've seen AVG have 98% detection and then 89% and the same with a few others. I know each virus "test" is different but personally I do not trust any of them.

Yes thats true

[DarkButterfly]

I find those anti-virus tests quite funny. Why? The tests are performed on Virtual Machines and few malware can bypass VM's "tricks", so that they infect them. Also, malware developers have no interest (at the moment) to develop malware that infects VM's. Why? Because we can ditch them. Their intent is to do evil at a larger scale and few people use VM's.

Meaning that the infections on such tests are not really infections, rather binary files they place on the VM's before they install the anti-something solutions.

In a real system, if such tests were performed, they wouldn't be able to test the anti-something solutions in most cases. Why? Many viruses make it impossible for you to install anything, including anti-virus, anti-spyware, etc. So, those tests do not reflect real infections.

Besides we do not want the highest DETECTION. We want the highest PREVENTION. And here CFP with Defense+ make one hell of a difference.

(And I am eagerly waiting for CAV 3 )

[Osage]

Its very hard to rate CAVS3 because it does not exist yet, but I am willing to wait, and maybe willing to wait after the release because I am guessing it will need some real world post beta testing before it finally starts being really competitive.

And given the fact that AV's are tested using different testing methods and criteria by a large number of fairly 
unbiased organizations, I take any test result with a grain of salt.

But the testing thing that somewhat bothers me most, is the lose focus factor in our expectations. I somewhat expect the job of a AV is to protect me from Viruses and trojans, there are some 5.5 million of those already and a  heaping full plate as it is, but when we also expect them to also do the full range of malware, it may be an impossibly large job no one can do. So when a AV rating is largely based on the AV's ability to do general malware, I have to view those test results with a dubious value eye.

And that also why I have other anti spyware programs on my computer to help my AV and comodo3. And for that full range of non virus and non trojan malware, I rely on non AV antispyware programs  to do their job.

[Eddoes]

My current Antivirus is no 49 and its the best.

[Eddoes]

I think Norton should be No 01 in the malware list

[Eddoes]

I think Norton should be No 01 in the malware list

Ohh yeah i forgot to mention I want Soyabeaner to Quote on what I just said cause he always has something funny to say.

[MJ1988]

Interesting.

Someone posted other test results, here I believe. It said CAVS2 had about a 70% effectiveness. Which isn't at all bad for a beta product.


I sense bias information!

[Tags:]