Comodo Agrees to pay $50,000 to AV-Comparatives.org.....

[Guest]

[Valentin N]

we find working with AV-test to be a professional experience so far. I can see us using them again in future. We find working with ICSA (ISO certified) and VB100 also a very professional experience and looking forward to continuing to work with them.

Thanks for the heads up. It's good someone stand out in the public and shows the truth or what goes under the scene unethical.

I am sure you chose to go out with this in public to show what's going on, with evidence, good and accurate reason, and for that I admire your spirit! Not many would have the guts to do that, for what ever reason.

[Melih]

Thanks for the heads up. It's good someone stand out in the public and shows the truth or what goes under the scene unethical.

I am sure you chose to go out with this in public to show what's going on, with evidence, good and accurate reason, and for that I admire your spirit! Not many would have the guts to do that, for what ever reason.

Thank you!

Melih

[vix123]

Microsoft lists AV-Comparatives as one of the "most widely recognized programs and testing bodies"

VB100 regularly publishes AV-Comparatives press releases at their news.

PC Magazine states that "AV-Comparatives.org is a well-regarded independent lab devoted to testing antivirus and other security products".

I think Melih is wrong in his assertion.

[Melih]

Microsoft lists AV-Comparatives as one of the "most widely recognized programs and testing bodies"

VB100 regularly publishes AV-Comparatives press releases at their news.

PC Magazine states that "AV-Comparatives.org is a well-regarded independent lab devoted to testing antivirus and other security products".

I think Melih is wrong in his assertion.

Madoff was trusted by many and for billions of $ until he was outed...
I am not saying AVC is like Madoff, but they do need to provide 3rd party auditing and some proper certification and behave professionally. They can't try to bully people who pay them money because someone said something they didn't like.

I would be the first one to support them if they were to change their ways and become certified, get 3rd party validation and behave professionally!

Melih

[Valentin N]

Microsoft lists AV-Comparatives as one of the "most widely recognized programs and testing bodies"

Microsoft says a lot...

VB100 regularly publishes AV-Comparatives press releases at their news.

That doesn't mean anything; look at malwaretips.com it's listed there aswell but that doesn't mean that it's trustworthy. there only tests are presented and nothing more. VB100 maybe does it to give them more viewers and if AV-C does the same then VB100 will get more viewers but that its a win win situation and both of them wins one it but that's mean they see each other as trust worthy.

PC Magazine states that "AV-Comparatives.org is a well-regarded independent lab devoted to testing antivirus and other security products".

Good for them. I take their testing and reviews with a grant salt.

I think Melih is wrong in his assertion.

One more thing... It would be unwise of Melih of performing such action if he didn't know what he was doing; if everything he says is wrong then only he and his company has to lose and I am sure that's something the CEO of COMODO won't risk of doing.

I am not defending COMODO or its CEO but doing such thing would rune the company if it's a lie.

[lordraiden]

-AV-Comparatives.org gets money from AV-Vendors for their tests, how much from each vendor, we don't know.

-AV-Comparatives.org is NOT certified (other wellknown testing organisations like ICSA are certified by ISO).

-AV-Comparatives.org is NOT audited

-AV-Comparatives.org test results are NOT validated by anyone.

-AV-Comparatives.org tries to muzzle AntiVirus vendors by bullying them (see my blog for proof)

-AV-Comparatives.org tries to make the users think they are independent and do not provide transparency about  their financial relationship with Antivirus companies.

1) How much have you been paying to the different sponsored test where CIS has appear? we don't know, what do you have to hide?

2) 3) 4) That does not mean anything according to what I wrote here: http://forums.comodo.com/melihs-corner-ceo-talkdiscussionsblog/comodo-agrees-to-pay-50000-to-avcomparativesorg-t79151.0.html;msg583157#msg583157
Who audit and validate all the other test where CIS takes part and CIS has paid (we don't know how much) for being tested.

5) that is your view point, but it's call business, you requested an additional work, you have to pay for it. If you already paid something to them you should have a paper where is written what is included, if you have that, sue them if not all you can do is what you are doing in the forums... nothing, well you got what you were looking for... make noise.

6) Everybody knew that AVC wasn't free, so now what?

And about the bunch of emails that does not proof anything just say that at the end who has publish confidential information its you and not them

Ahm for the next time you should ask how much cost something before you think its free or its included, if you supposed something different is your fault.

Anyway I'm happy to see that MRG is going to test CIS... what you have done... xD

[vix123]

I would be the first one to support them

You already have. They got your money, don't they ?

[lordraiden]

You already have. They got your money, don't they ?

AVC is paying with its own money an ISO certification, I guess they will have it soon, but this things takes some time.

[Melih]

6) Everybody knew that AVC wasn't free, so now what?

This statement is NOT true!!!!!

[lordraiden]

This statement is NOT true!!!!!

Oh! yes, sorry, that is not true, you didn't know it 

In order to know it you just have to ask them, I did it and they answered (like 1 year ago). You can even ask in wildersforums, they will tell you.

So I guess that you agree with me in the other points? since you only answer what you like.

[kail]

Oh! yes, sorry, that is not true, you didn't know it 

In order to know it you just have to ask them, I did it and they answered (like 1 year ago). You can even ask in wildersforums, they will tell you. ..

I guess you must mean this question..

Hi, av-comparatives website claims that it is a non-profit organization. However, even non-profit organization need funding to operate, and with amount of tests I assume it is quite some funding.

av-test.org, for example, is clearly commercial organization - the do tests for money and are paid (I assume) by AV companies, - and they state that they are commercial company, which makes me take their tests with a grain of salt.

It would be nice to know how av-comparatives manages to maintain the "non-profit" status?

.. with the subsequent answer..

AV-Comparatives is a registered NPO consisting of an independent team of researchers which conduct various tests of security software. This is supported by the Austrian Government and international companies around the globe which cover the costs and make it possible to provide independent security software tests for free to the public.

source [av-comparatives.org]

Yes, very clear that.

It's also a pity that the EU is actually fairly concerned about NGOs and NPOs in Europe (specifically in Austria, and other such nations where current legislation is somewhat weak). I believe this is primarily about their transparency and accountability of their finances, or rather the complete lack of it. Due to terrorism, the EU got all twitchy about this when they suddenly realised as few years back that they couldn't actually see what NGOs and NPOs, from certain nations, were doing.. at all. But, I guess you must already know that Austrian NPOs are about as transparent as concrete. Right?

BTW I hope you realise that you're bringing up the same old stuff that's already been covered in this topic.

[clockwork]

The real problem is not a number in a test of an antivirus.
I read a public experience report of someone who was sick of helping people out when they have a virus. And it seemed to happen often. It was described as if it would be normal day happenings to get a virus with windows. So normal, that "windows user accepted it as given".
He referred to drive by downloads when he explained how he got hit by a "hijack OS virus". And he said, its impossible to be protected against new threats.
Yes, he found a real good solution for his problem (no sarcasm), he suggests linux now to all his people as long as they dont play games. .... as long as they dont play games.....
How honorable this might be, (yes, linux should be widespreaded among those who dont play, so in the long term linux is as common that games will be released for linux too!)
but his experiences are only happening because he thought that antivirus and a firewall/router is the way to protect a computer. And otherwise do the cleaning.
I wondered a lot, to see someone who is able to march through the registry, observing the bootblock, knowing about virus removals (how much time he wasted to get the knowledge), while he didnt invested thoughts on how to avoid all this. I dont know how to "clean" a trojan which isnt detected yet (or if its clean afterwards at all). But i dont get infected! Thats smarter, while having less knowledge

When even here is debated if an antivirus test is this, or if its that, basically its just what was so sad in this experience report, the assumption: "A more reputated test of >antivirus reflects the real protection< is better/more true".

Instead of argumenting about antivirus tests,
spread the word about
Sandbox(IE) and host intrusion protections. Because this is protecting people, no matter what number their antivirus has.
If antivirus ABC gets 99% in a superplus reputated and audited test, and thats what you are fighting for, people will get infected.
Thats why i dont care about this drama.
I care about protection.
Its ironic that comodo arguments on the same level like the "antivirus only companies": Results of tests of antivirus is what we have to believe and trust in. The only concern we need to have, is, if the tests are reputated.
Thats a step backwards.




 

[EricJH]

5) that is your view point, but it's call business, you requested an additional work, you have to pay for it. If you already paid something to them you should have a paper where is written what is included, if you have that, sue them if not all you can do is what you are doing in the forums... nothing, well you got what you were looking for... make noise.

Since when is doing business the same as breaking contractual agreement? That's what this all started with in second instance. To quote Melih from in AV-Comparatives.org, bullying, censorship and financial deals with Anti Virus vendors – continued.. :

“we may post our reply on Monday in public. (e.g. we could clarify that Comodo paid for not releasing their results – the various static detection tests etc. that were commissioned by Comodo)”

What AV-Comparative threatened Comodo with was for AV-Comparatives to reveal confidential information about Comodo,  as you can see above, even the existence of the agreement was confidential as per the agreement. So AV-Comparatives first signs an agreement that is confidential, then threatens you that they will release this confidential information if you don’t do what they say. This is totally unethical!

Do you really think it is good business to breach contractual agreements? Remember bobody forced AV-C to make this type of contract.

[vix123]

You guys do have a point here. AV-Comparatives should not have released (or threat to release) such information.

Of course that doesn't affect me (as an end user) in the least. Quite the contrary. I am glad to see Comodo was using AV-Comparatives all this time as I always trusted them as a good antivirus test.

[lordraiden]

Since when is doing business the same as breaking contractual agreement? That's what this all started with in second instance. To quote Melih from in AV-Comparatives.org, bullying, censorship and financial deals with Anti Virus vendors – continued.. :Do you really think it is good business to breach contractual agreements? Remember bobody forced AV-C to make this type of contract.

Could you show me when/how they broke the agreement?  you can't right, because they didn't
I can show you how Melih has publish confidential emails/information, but you don't care about that you have to protect Melih.

The history is, Melih go to a shop to buy and he get something thinking that will be free, the sales tell him that he has to pay and threat him to shot him if he go outside the shop without paying Melih take a gun and kill the sales, Melih then go to the newspaper crying because a salesman has threaten him.
END OF THE STORY

[Tags:]