Author Topic: AV-Comparatives tests Comodo against Android malware...and results are not good.  (Read 596 times)

Offline aweir14150

  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 410
Comodo scored a disappointing 70.6% in the latest malware test.
https://www.av-comparatives.org/mobile-security/


« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 12:04:27 AM by aweir14150 »

Offline Jon79

  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
Did you expect anything different? Detection has never been Comodo's strength and in Mobile Protection there's no sandbox to help...

Offline aweir14150

  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 410
Without the sandbox, there's no defense for having low detection rates. Why does Comodo even bother having an AV at all when all it's doing is hurting and not helping their reputation?
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 12:52:05 PM by aweir14150 »

Offline peopleinside

  • Comodo Loves me
  • ****
  • Posts: 164
  • Passionate Security
Yes, seems there are a very bad score on AV-TEST detection.
No test for the mobile, only for the PC and the score is not the best, is one of the lower results.
:embarassed:

And on mobile there are no more test. Is not casual, maybe. Sad to see this.
Comodo need maybe help from an external viruses database for have a better score.

Offline Graham1

  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1868
I think Comodo need to adopt a default deny approach for CMS. Any apps downloaded or manually installed, should prompt the user (allow/deny) when run. Also, prompt when any app tries to communicate over wifi/ota (like a firewall). Privacy permissions (i.e. get position, read contacts, use camera, etc) could also be added but probably disabled by default. Whether this could be applied on non-rooted, I don't know but signature detection should be added as secondary protection.

:)
Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (x64) | Chromium | uBlock Origin | Privacy Badger | HTTPS Everywhere

https://www.thevenusproject.com | Beyond Politics Poverty and War

 

Seo4Smf 2.0 © SmfMod.Com Smf Destek