Author Topic: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors  (Read 56792 times)

Offline Tech

  • Usability Study Member
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3027
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #30 on: November 27, 2011, 06:40:28 PM »
I think they should publish prices or at least that they are getting paid to do the tests. They don't mention this anywhere on the website that I can see.
Agree, they should publish somewhere how the things work. But not the price itself imho.

on your second thing, what? I don't understand what you are saying.
I'm just saying that different tests and different methodologies will give you different results (due to your phrase: So how come in your tests other av companies do so well when in my tests most fail miserably?).
avast! team member
Save freeware snapshot technology of Comodo Time Machine. Vote!

Offline Melih

  • CEO - Comodo
  • Administrator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 14533
    • Video Blog
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #31 on: November 27, 2011, 06:50:34 PM »
Agree, they should publish somewhere how the things work. But not the price itself imho.
I'm just saying that different tests and different methodologies will give you different results (due to your phrase: So how come in your tests other av companies do so well when in my tests most fail miserably?).

its a non for profit organisation they claim, so why do they have such a big issue with the fact that they get paid from AntiVirus vendors and how much they get? Doesn't make sense.

Offline Melih

  • CEO - Comodo
  • Administrator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 14533
    • Video Blog
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #32 on: November 27, 2011, 06:53:57 PM »
Anyone who is wondering how Comodo did in these totally irrelevant dead malware testing test, here is what Andreas said:

*********************************
From: Andreas Clementi [mailto:a[at]av-comparatives.org]
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 11:11 AM
To: ‘Egemen Tas’; ‘Umesh Kumar Gupta’
Cc: p[at]av-comparatives.org
Subject: AW: AW: AW: AW: Main Test Feb-2011

Hi,
 
btw, do not be unhappy about the „other malware/viruses“ %s, you will see in the report that also other vendors score low there (mainly because that category contains non-PE malware). Furthermore, your ~90% is higher than what some few other products scored and similar to what other well-known products reached. You will see 

regards,

andreas

AV-Comparatives e.V.

a[at]av-comparatives.org

http://www.av-comparatives.org

 

Tel.: +43 512

Mobile: +43 676

Innsbruck | Austria | Europe

**********************


"Furthermore, your ~90% is higher than what some few other products scored and similar to what other well-known products reached"

Offline languy99

  • Global Moderator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3970
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #33 on: November 27, 2011, 06:54:25 PM »
I'm just saying that different tests and different methodologies will give you different results (due to your phrase: So how come in your tests other av companies do so well when in my tests most fail miserably?).

right different tests, seeing as they use more malware then me and seeing as statistics says the bigger the sample base the more accurate your results, they should easily find malware that bypasses most security out there. If I can find some with my small sample set they should have no problem. But yet all of their security tests show that most AV's do much much better then what they should really do.

Testing methodology at least should basically be the same. It's really simple, run the malware and see if it does any damage to the system. This is what their "dynamic" test should be.
http://www.youtube.com/languy99

Software Reviews for all.

Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/#!/languy99

Offline Melih

  • CEO - Comodo
  • Administrator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 14533
    • Video Blog
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #34 on: November 27, 2011, 06:58:48 PM »
right different tests, seeing as they use more malware then me and seeing as statistics says the bigger the sample base the more accurate your results, they should easily find malware that bypasses most security out there. If I can find some with my small sample set they should have no problem. But yet all of their security tests show that most AV's do much much better then what they should really do.

Testing methodology at least should basically be the same. It's really simple, run the malware and see if it does any damage to the system. This is what their "dynamic" test should be.

agreed 10000%!!!

The reality is that in the real world when real users test the real products, we see a different picture than what is being painted by av-comparatives. The end users who do these tests are NOT paid by anyone so they have no reason not to report the reality.


Offline Melih

  • CEO - Comodo
  • Administrator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 14533
    • Video Blog
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #35 on: November 27, 2011, 07:02:15 PM »
Also it is such a shame to bring your "competitors" into this discussion in an effort to deflect from their issues by referring to other testing organisations in their Blog by AV-Comparatives. I can categorically state that we have found every other testing organisation we worked with to be very professional, honest, open and hard working.

Melih

Offline languy99

  • Global Moderator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3970
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #36 on: November 27, 2011, 07:06:12 PM »
I have an idea about how to fix the money issue with the testing.

Basically for each test you perform you have a company pay for the test covering everyone else but they are not tested. The next test another one pays and they don't get tested but the first one does. I know it will be a much more expensive proposition for the companies but they are paying for the testing up front.

Lets say each year you will be doing 10 tests and you have 20 companies. So for test one company 1 and 2 pay for the testing and companies 3 - 20 are tested bot not 1 and 2. The next test companies 3 and 4 pay but 1 and 2 and 5 -20 are tested.
http://www.youtube.com/languy99

Software Reviews for all.

Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/#!/languy99

Offline w-e-v

  • Star Group
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1476
  • BETA FORCE MEMBER
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #37 on: November 27, 2011, 08:23:18 PM »
Also it is such a shame to bring your "competitors" into this discussion in an effort to deflect from their issues by referring to other testing organisations in their Blog by AV-Comparatives. I can categorically state that we have found every other testing organisation we worked with to be very professional, honest, open and hard working.

Melih

You can see that results from their "competitors" also have some flaws. Just take a look at this:

Microsoft Security Essentials 2.0 CERTIFIED
2.5 Protection
3.5 Repair
5.0 Usability

Total Defense: Internet Security Suite 2011 NOT CERTIFIED
2.5 Protection
3.5 Repair
3.0 Usability

Source: http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/test-reports/julaug-2011/

Both AV got exactly the same VERY LOW protection rate.
Both AV got exavtly the same AVERAGE repair rate.
The only difference its that one got a higher Usability rate.
And just because a higher rate in Usability, it gets Certified. ???

So you have a certified product with very low protection and repair rates (in other words, not good).
And it gets certified next no other good protection products, only because its Usability.

Offline casachit

  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #38 on: November 27, 2011, 10:23:31 PM »
"Furthermore, your ~90% is higher than what some few other products scored and similar to what other well-known products reached"

if comodo had scored more than 90% then what was the problem for comodo to release it to public???... anyway it was good result.....

Offline Melih

  • CEO - Comodo
  • Administrator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 14533
    • Video Blog
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #39 on: November 27, 2011, 10:29:32 PM »
"Melih continuously stated in his forum that we get paid by vendors, and insinuated that the payments have an influence on the results. "

I stated AV-Comparatives gets paid by AntiVirus Vendors....now after my blog post many know this to be a fact....(and this fact should be in bold in their website)

But where have I "insinuated" that the payments have an influence in the posts that Peter refers to? I haven't....this is more of a case of a "chip on the shoulder" scenario it seems.....

Offline Melih

  • CEO - Comodo
  • Administrator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 14533
    • Video Blog
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #40 on: November 27, 2011, 10:34:25 PM »
if comodo had scored more than 90% then what was the problem for comodo to release it to public???... anyway it was good result.....

Yes it was a good result....but still wasn't testing the "real protection" capability of CIS :( "Automatic Sandboxing" with amazing D+!!!

We were a thorn on the side to them because properly testing CIS means they have to change the way they work....instead they chose to keep the status quo and continue spreading misguiding views about AntiVirus products.

The Most ANTI (real ANTI) Virus product is CIS!!!! yet these guys who claim to be the "testers" for the Antivirus industry cannot test the latest AntiVirus product!!! I mean, come on.....They should not claim the title of testing AntiVirus products if they can't test them, period!

Offline iSquirtink

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #41 on: November 27, 2011, 10:52:50 PM »
I'm putting my 2cents into this issue. I've used many antiviruses in my day. Stopped using Comodo back in the day when it 1st came out as a firewall due to the pop ups. Now in that time many viruses have hit all of my various antiviruses (Symantec, AVG, Kaspersky, & Avira) every single one of them failed me sooner or later with at least 1 virus getting through.

The point is I bloody trusted companies like AV-Comparatives etc... They always post stellar detection and on-demand scanning for these companies. Problem is in the real world it's bloated, slows down my internet, boot times take longer etc...

I used to hold companies that do so called testing for the benefit of users in very high regard. Well now I know how they work don't agree with it at all. You can't test Comodo 1980's style as Melih says it has too many bloody layers. Stop disabling features it has then cry about it infecting you and posting detection and on demand failures because you can't base your tests on new scanning methods.

Listen the best way to show up a product like Comodo in fact any antivirus company is by posting a video like Languy99. You cannot hide the way you tested because we can see what you tried and also the company will replicate it if you try to be funny. I used to take test results based on these testing companies with a pinch of salt now I know it probably needs at least a bloody tablespoon full.

Now when I switched back to Comodo because they worked on the pop ups and also included an antivirus FINALLY :P I've never been infected yet. Listen they still do have pop ups and when I play Left4dead2 it thinks it's a virus/unsafe which I find bloody funny as the people in the game are infected. I'm waiting for it to be white listed. Also checking my email with Postbox denies connection to the internet which I need to white list. What I'm getting at is Comodo needs alerts and yes it's annoying but having a product with 0 alerts and the company promoting it is foolish. In the end you get infected and no alerts the irony. Enjoy 0 alerts >:-D

Conclusion this post is long I need to go kill stuff in game for caring for a security company. I must be high 88) I paid for Comodo Internet Security Complete eventhough all I want is free why? Simple I trust a CEO which speaks out right or wrong anytime to one that sits behind his suit and has a software ALL BRIGHT YELLOW. Some may not agree with Melih, Comodo staff & fanboys can't forget them too but they have the best results in videos and real world testing.

It's proven & has a great community ;D I really like reading this forum for some odd reason because people actually care to help. Alright I'm heading to the nearest hospital bye!


Offline Chiron

  • Global Moderator
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 11951
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #43 on: November 27, 2011, 11:37:52 PM »
I'm putting my 2cents into this issue. I've used many antiviruses in my day. Stopped using Comodo back in the day when it 1st came out as a firewall due to the pop ups. Now in that time many viruses have hit all of my various antiviruses (Symantec, AVG, Kaspersky, & Avira) every single one of them failed me sooner or later with at least 1 virus getting through.

The point is I bloody trusted companies like AV-Comparatives etc... They always post stellar detection and on-demand scanning for these companies. Problem is in the real world it's bloated, slows down my internet, boot times take longer etc...

I used to hold companies that do so called testing for the benefit of users in very high regard. Well now I know how they work don't agree with it at all. You can't test Comodo 1980's style as Melih says it has too many bloody layers. Stop disabling features it has then cry about it infecting you and posting detection and on demand failures because you can't base your tests on new scanning methods.

Listen the best way to show up a product like Comodo in fact any antivirus company is by posting a video like Languy99. You cannot hide the way you tested because we can see what you tried and also the company will replicate it if you try to be funny. I used to take test results based on these testing companies with a pinch of salt now I know it probably needs at least a bloody tablespoon full.

Now when I switched back to Comodo because they worked on the pop ups and also included an antivirus FINALLY :P I've never been infected yet. Listen they still do have pop ups and when I play Left4dead2 it thinks it's a virus/unsafe which I find bloody funny as the people in the game are infected. I'm waiting for it to be white listed. Also checking my email with Postbox denies connection to the internet which I need to white list. What I'm getting at is Comodo needs alerts and yes it's annoying but having a product with 0 alerts and the company promoting it is foolish. In the end you get infected and no alerts the irony. Enjoy 0 alerts >:-D

Conclusion this post is long I need to go kill stuff in game for caring for a security company. I must be high 88) I paid for Comodo Internet Security Complete eventhough all I want is free why? Simple I trust a CEO which speaks out right or wrong anytime to one that sits behind his suit and has a software ALL BRIGHT YELLOW. Some may not agree with Melih, Comodo staff & fanboys can't forget them too but they have the best results in videos and real world testing.

It's proven & has a great community ;D I really like reading this forum for some odd reason because people actually care to help. Alright I'm heading to the nearest hospital bye!
Exactly.

By the way, anyone who has ever been infected while using Comodo Firewall, or CIS, (without disabling features) ;)) please post below. Let us know how it has failed you, in a realistic, real-world scenario.

Then let's compare that to the other well known products. ;D
Then, perhaps, we can compare these results to the results obtained by any AV testing organization. :o

PS:
I have nothing against the testing organizations, I just don't believe that their tests accurately reflect the protection that an end-user actually gets. By the way, that doesn't just go for Comodo. I also believe that other products are under-appreciated because of these testing procedures as well.

Offline w-e-v

  • Star Group
  • Comodo's Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1476
  • BETA FORCE MEMBER
Re: AV-comparatives.org, bullying, and financial deals with anti virus vendors
« Reply #44 on: November 27, 2011, 11:53:18 PM »
URL: http://www.av-comparatives.org/forum/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=1054
Quote
We have told Comodo in the past that testing Comodo Internet Security showed it to be very noisy (very many user-dependent pop-ups and lot of false alarms) and that we could not see it working well enough to test it with the automation we had at that time. This was a nice way to say that their software needed improvements. We even suggested how they could word it on their website, without saying that it was due to their scores; they didn't do that at the time, but kept quiet.

"This was a nice way to say that their software needed improvements."

Am I am missing something?
People using other vendors software for "protection" its getting infected.
People using COMODO, just a very minimum for small reasons, rarely gets infected.

How can they say that COMODO software need improvements?
Isnt it their Testing Methodology that should be improved?

What I really think they wanted to say its:
"This was a nice way to say that our testing procedures need improvements. We are not ready for COMODO protection architecture."

 

Seo4Smf 2.0 © SmfMod.Com Smf Destek