AV Test

[khanyash]

Right Click Scan & Remaining were Executed.
XP SP3 32 Bits Real System (No VM)
All the products latest version & updates

Zero-Day Malware - 211

Avast Default Detected - 137

PUP Enabled Detected - 6

AutoSandbox Popped Up For - 9 (Counted as Detection)

Total Detected - 152

Total Missed - 59

I tested Avast AutoSandbox as it doesn’t sandboxes all unknown so tested to see how it does.

Comodo Default Detected - 158

Comodo Cloud Detected - 4

Total Detected - 162

Total Missed - 49

I didn’t tested Comodo AutoSandbox as it sandboxes all unknown.

MyFreeAntivirus Default Detected - 143

Active Virus Control Detected - 6

Total Detected - 149

Total Missed - 62

Kingsoft AV 2012 Default Detected - 138

Process Blocked Popup - 2

Total Detected - 140

Total Missed - 71

[jebuchanan]

I think you should also test with auto sandbox on as a true CIS comparison with other sandboxes and to show full protection capability of CIS (are you using D+ also?)

[khanyash]

@John Buchanan post:2

I think you should also test with auto sandbox on as a true CIS comparison with other sandboxes and to show full protection capability of CIS (are you using D+ also?)

Everyone knows Comodo AutoSandbox will prevent almost all the malware & it would be unfair to test it with others which are just an AV with no such features. Tested Avast AutoSandbox to see how it does as it is like behaviour/reputation/heur based.

Yes I kept D+ enabled but checked Dont Give Popup Alerts & set it to Allow under D+ settings & Disabled Sandbox. This is the setting I use on one of my system so tested this way.

[Solarlynx]

Naren, you are great as usually.
Though I would offer some corrections:
1.

@John Buchanan post:2

I think you should also test with auto sandbox on as a true CIS comparison with other sandboxes and to show full protection capability of CIS…

It’s more correct to test the av we use, not to strip it.

@naren post:3

Everyone knows Comodo AutoSandbox will prevent almost all the malware & it would be unfair to test it with others which are just an AV

Imho it’s vice versa - unfair to CAV to strip it.

The name of the thread ‘AV Test’ resembles the ‘AV-TEST’ company. Maybe it’s better to change the name, for instance ‘Antimalware Test’ or even ‘Naren test’ - as you often give us your nice tests and it will be easier to find them when you post them.

Thanx

[HeffeD]

@naren post:3

Everyone knows Comodo AutoSandbox will prevent almost all the malware & it would be unfair to test it with others which are just an AV with no such features. Tested Avast AutoSandbox to see how it does as it is like behaviour/reputation/heur based.

???

I’m thinking you’ve got the fairness angle a little bit skewed…

[Solarlynx]

@naren post:3

Everyone knows Comodo AutoSandbox will prevent almost all the malware & it would be unfair to test it with others which are just an AV…

It’s as if to say everyone knows CIS is the strongest in protection so let’s disable D+ (as no other av has it) for fair competition. ;D

[Melih]

@Solarlynx post:6

It’s as if to say everyone knows CIS is the strongest in protection so let’s disable D+ (as no other av has it) for fair competition. ;D

its like saying: the 100 meter Olympic sprinter is too fast for everyone, so we will cut his one leg off to make it fair to the others

[Solarlynx]

@Melih post:7

its like saying: the 100 meter Olympic sprinter is too fast for everyone, so we will cut his one leg off to make it fair to the others

lol

Imho anyway Naren’s test are important to learn about av’s perfomance. And the results says even stripped CIS beats its competitors. :-TU

I hope Naren won’t get hurt by jokes over ‘fairness’ of the approach and continue publishing his tests. With full options of all avs, please.

[jebuchanan]

What jokes.
I was serious about using CIS fully, not crippled, in the comparison test.

[khanyash]

Heyy Guyz,

Thanxx for the suggestion, criticism, appreciation, etc.

The test was to test only the signs, heur & behaviour. You can say traditional approach.

Avast AutoSandbox was tested as its heur, behaviour kind of approach.

But definitely CIS 6 will be tested heavily with all its default defenses.

NJoi…
Naren

[khanyash]

Kingsoft AV 2012 SP 5 Results added in the first post.

[Solarlynx]

Could you, please make test of Kingsoft AV with more heavy settings for KAV:

1. System Defense in Standard Monitor,
2. checked “Force Cloud to identify unknown programs” as “Unknown programs must be identified before being executed”
   It’s interesting to know are these setting really strong and worth to be used.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[khanyash]

The test was also done with standard monitor enabled but made no difference.

Force Cloud option was not there in SP 5 or I didn’t properly checked. But I think it was not there.

[Solarlynx]

@naren post:13

The test was also done with standard monitor enabled but made no difference.

Force Cloud option was not there in SP 5 or I didn’t properly checked. But I think it was not there.

Really, thank you, Naren.

You are quite right - there is not Force Cloud option in SP5.
KAV didn’t warned me that there’s new SP5 though Autoupdate is on.
So standard monitor appears to be not so useful…
I have vague apprehensions that some functions of these smart-gui-new-avs are not so good as they expected to be.

[khanyash]

Quick Monitor - I think will detect the malware only on execution.

Standard Monitor - I think will detect the malware on access.

Any other difference is there? Coz it didn’t made any difference in detection.