AV-C 2011 April report

New report of AV-C is issued. Awards and Detection rates are belowed.

Report: http://www.av-comparatives.org/en/comparativesreviews/detection-test (it is the test of Feb 2011).

Why arent CIS in that test?

20 products and not Comodo…

I think MSE did well with 95 & 1 FP. Many AV testers have said that AVG’s Behaviour Blocker at times detects more malware than its Signatures so I guess AVG’s score can be little higher with the BB but they dont test BB. The top free AV’s are tested with highest settings. I think the vendors should set the default to highest. Why they ask to test the product with highest setting when it is not the default setting used by majority of users?? This test means nothing for majority of users.

As for Comodo, I guess they dont test an AV which is not an AV but a usability thing!!


It has been said several times that CIS is going to be tested in Single Product Review first.

In the year 2020

Add my 20 to it

In the way…202020

I adapted the url of the opening post because AV-Comparatives does not allow deep linking:

It is not allowed to offer the results in any form in full or in parts on a website for download,or to take parts of it into own tests or to use the data ulterior without a written permission of the management board of AV-Comparatives.

If that quote is true, then the images in the OP should also be removed.

Fair enough - pix removed.

Excuse me but this is a anti-virus test, so it’s not Comodo Internet Security but Comodo Antivirus. Please stick to the facts. Some companies are not serious about testing Comodo products. This is a sad fact and of course I don’t like it. :frowning: Regards.

Whatever CIS or CAV does not matter, it’s an on-demand test that all you need to know.

Which companies are not serious?

Hi lordraiden,

CAV is a real pure ■■■■ if you wanna know my opinion …
… Sure you don’t :wink:
, but anyway it was “created for a convince having a Suite” Ha! but by itself is is disasters load of swill/sewer

probably and most likely, but we need a confirmation from OP …

as far as I can see it - OP means those companies that are testing.
I could be wrong and I will accept the correction by OP, but the one company that is not serious is Comodo , since this AV should not be developed in the 1st place

Yes, you will get another flood of posts here by fan-boys including moderators, saying that it may decrease Pop-ups notifications … just because :o
I cannot accept that as an argument - that is just bloody BS as blunt & simple as that!


Why? Because they do want to see as many FPs as possible as a result of AVC testing but they don’t want their users to be subjected to the stress of blocked or quarantined safe files.
Of course “this test means nothing to the majority of users”. How many of the hundreds of millions of “Avast, AVIRA, Kaspersky, Symantec” users would even be aware of the existence of AVC. Comodoland is a tiny tiny subculture where the mantra of 100% detection echoes through the corridors. The rest of the world is… just not all that interested.

Of course I dont care your opinion, it couldn’t be more biased and unfounded

There are several on demand tests made to Comodo.

I dont see Comodo in the lasts positions of any on demand test.

For dynamic testing is obvious that Comodo will probably be the best one.

Who is talking about popups?

but the one company that is not serious is Comodo , since this AV should not be developed in the 1st place

Nice non sense sentence ;D very well argued

Hi lordraiden, & thanks 4 the reply

It seems like we were posting at the same time ( usual stuff ) :slight_smile: when I was replying to CEO … having no idea about the new user yet

As for the other stuff - I am not biased . I do appreciate your opinion I am with Comodo from day 1(!)
And as far as I know I helped to improve at least few things , which you are using now communicating with the members of this community and with Russian developers - enjoy!

You are biased as I can see it , not me
as an example :

Are you aware of what you are taking about regarding the matter? Have you read this forum before?

Mainly I am not in the mood for to confrontation at this particular moment … despite I can do that >:-D

Therefore, before judging my post(s) as a nonsense, please calm down and if you have few spare minute re-read way-way back

My regards

I have read this forum before but I advice you read the title of this thread

You said that CAV is ■■■■, no proofs, no arguments… yes your post is a non sense.

What? You must be joking. According to You CIS and CAV are the same thing? Well, I greet you cordially.
Testing CAV is not testing CIS. This is totally something else. Hey man - antivirus and Internet Security tests are not the same…

You didn’t get it.

The important thing is that is an on-demand test, the test that we are talking about in the thread, in that case does not matter if you test CIS or CAV the result is going to be the same.

Can you tell us what the difference is? Because I don’t see any…

Valentin N