I don’t know that refusal is quite correct. I think, and this is purely my take on things, that Comodo don’t see the sense of testing a dynamic style protection suite (CIS) in purely static tests. Personally, I don’t think that CAV should be released as a standalone product when their AV engine performs best as part of the overall suite.
If the test was of a more dynamic nature, where the malware does not already exist on the test system, then it would be more correct to test the complete CIS suite.
agree with you.
That’s where I believe that CIS shows its true colours - when tested in a dynamic manner- prevention then detection then removal - the way it happens in the real world.
Not all users run the full suite. There are users who just run FW & AV. So its important for them to know how effective is CAV. So IMO CAV should be tested as Standalone & CIS as Full Suite.
About Comodo: I'm sorry, but Comodo decided to keep the results of CIS internal and to do not publish them.
I understand antivirus detection rate does not equal how well a computer is protected but it would be nice to see how well CAV scores against these other AVs in terms of detection…
DYNAMIC DETECTION
Industry average: 62%
Blocking of Malware: 100%[/b]
AV-Test.org is a respectable German testing organisation that employs 20 people and has more than 15 years of experience in the area of anti-virus research (http://www.av-test.org/about) (i think the largest AV Testing organisation in Europe)
