Is the AntiVirus biggest fraud in the security world?

[Guest]

[Melih]

AntiVirus, is, the way it is marketed, fraud?

Shouldn't they tell you that it won't protect you?

would love to hear your views..

thanks
Melih

[Dch48]

No, not at all. An AV will protect you, from known threats. I don't know of any AV that claims to protect you 100% from new malware. If there are any that do claim that, they're lying. A fraud, no, I don't think so at all. That's way overstating the case. It's a lot safer to have an AV than not to.

[Melih]

did you read the anti virus software company's website?

Pls read what they say and then tell me if this legacy Anti Virus products are not being overmarketed or not!

Overstating? I don't think so.
Overmarketing? Totally!

Melih

PS: pls do look at the marketing claims they make on their websites...

[panic]

I don't know of any AV that claims to protect you 100% from new malware. If there are any that do claim that, they're lying.

2 URLs and 3 minutes later - found one!!!! They do exist. 

[Melih]

Can we pls put the URLs and their claim here so that everyone can see. Perhaps we can put a screenshot of AV vendor's claims to see if they sell this a protection/prevention from (all) malware or not.

thank you very much.

Melih

PS: for clarification my issue is not with AV as a technology. The issue is the way its marketed.

[Banned]

What about this

The VB100 award was first introduced in 1998. In order to display the VB100 logo, an anti-virus product must have demonstrated in our tests that:

    * It detects all In the Wild viruses during both on-demand and on-access scanning.
    * It generates no false positives when scanning a set of clean files.

The product must fulfil these criteria in its default state.

http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/index

Personally I don't use real time AV, I can't see the point, but I understand some feel it's a useful crutch.

[Dch48]

But--does "In the Wild" include new threats for which no signatures have been generated yet? To me it means known threats.  Even D+ does not actually detect new malware, it only alerts you to the activities they try to perform.

[Melih]

Can you pls provide some screenshot of anti virus vendors to see how they sell their product?

Lets see if they sell it as protection/prevention from (all) malware or not?

thanks
Melih

[OmeletGuy]

But--does "In the Wild" include new threats for which no signatures have been generated yet? To me it means known threats.  Even D+ does not actually detect new malware, it only alerts you to the activities they try to perform.

here look at this:

http://usa.kaspersky.com/products_services/HomeProducts.php

[MetalShaun]

Whether antivirus vendors say or not i still know alot of people that think just installing and standard signature AV like AVG will protect them.

Cheers
Shaun

[Melih]

Whether antivirus vendors say or not i still know alot of people that think just installing and standard signature AV like AVG will protect them.

Cheers
Shaun

Indeed Shaun.

and thats a shame and not the right information. And I don't see AV companies trying to change it.

Look at what is being said in the above link posted by OmeletGuy from one of the vendors:

"The most advanced Internet security with premium protection from viruses, spyware and all malware threats"

No wonder people think its ok to just have an AV product to protect themselves.

Is selling a product like AV product as "protection from viruses, spyware and all malware threats" ethical?

Melih

[Banned]

Virus Bulletin is just a test organization, you can register free or use a bugmenot login to see the results. The virus wildlist they use is supplied by http://www.wildlist.org From their FAQ they state:

When a virus is reported to us by two or more Reporters, it's a pretty good indication that the virus is out there, spreading, causing real problems to users. We consider such a virus to be 'In the Wild'.

As far as where is 'out there', we like the definition given by Paul Ducklin of Sophos, PLC in his paper 'Counting Viruses':

For a virus to be considered In the Wild, it must be spreading as a result of normal day-to-day operations on and between the computers of unsuspecting users.

I guess you can interpret that different ways, but it doesn't explicitly preclude unknown threats.

[Dch48]

If it's a completely new piece of malware , they wouldn't even have it to use in their tests. That's the point I was trying to make. "In The Wild" is what they know about.

[Anathaen]

Everybody knows that viruses are also very good business. There can be no cure without an infection first, it's like the good needs the bad to exist, otherwise there would be no purpose for the good.

Medicine is being prepared from poison as antidote.

You yourself point to the fact how it is, can you guarantee us, that you protect and keep protected against everything? Even stuff like in my signature?

[panic]

You yourself point to the fact how it is, can you guarantee us, that you protect and keep protected against everything? Even stuff like in my signature?

I think you have misinterpreted Melihs original post.

He was not saying "All others claim to be 100% effective, but they lie! Only Comodo can do that!"

I repeat - he did not say that.

He was saying that some methods and terminology used in the marketing for anti-malware apps can seriously mislead consumers.

Ewen :-)

[Tags:]