CAV3 detection rate test [2008.10.05] - 10.26% [CLOSED]

[Dennis2]

@Melih post:20

I am confident about catching the latest malware within a reasonable time.

However, testing organisations test using malware that is no longer around. So that forces AV vendors to go underground and try to find people who has collected libraries and sometimes people get paid for providing malware libraries! Which in turn encourages new malware because now you can make money by creating new malware and sell it to AV vendors who want to increase their detection!

You see, its a “broken system”! And we have people who feed that animal further by so called “testing”…

In my opinion the industry must get together and work in collaboration against malware! At the moment its too disjointed and hence malware is winning the war!

Melih

I can see this is a very difficult issue who to share or not for Comodo.
As soon as money is involved testing or otherwise it increases by 100%
Dennis

[triple]

@Melih post:20

I am confident about catching the latest malware within a reasonable time.

However, testing organisations test using malware that is no longer around. So that forces AV vendors to go underground and try to find people who has collected libraries and sometimes people get paid for providing malware libraries! Which in turn encourages new malware because now you can make money by creating new malware and sell it to AV vendors who want to increase their detection!

You see, its a “broken system”! And we have people who feed that animal further by so called “testing”…

In my opinion the industry must get together and work in collaboration against malware! At the moment its too disjointed and hence malware is winning the war!

Melih

NO, an anti virus program must catch all the viruses!! even the viruses that are not spread widely anymore… because you protect customers against evil code, and evil code can always come back in a new form… You can not blame testing organizations for testing all the malware that they came across, this is good because it makes an anti virus product better and better…

As for the System you are talking about, not all people who share their malware libraries for money are bad guys who do that to make money, look at your own organization, you have given some amount of malware for free, of course for the good cause… Yes it is possible that there are people who are selling malware to anti malware vendors and creating a market, which is basically means the vendors are corrupt, and the protection is an illusion and in hands of anti malware vendors and malware creators… But it is possible in some cases… But I do not think that is the reality, the reality is that the big vendors are fighting a real war with malware creators and their are on the winning hand because they have highly sophisticated research labs, for an example look at F- Secure from Finland… (:WIN)…

[Melih]

Triple X

I think there is a misunderstanding.

I never said all who share malware is bad, as Comodo does with other respectable organsiations. The issue was creating “Detection testing” which forces AV vendors to get this “high score” in testing which creates a false and dangerous race. Look at Matousec for example!

And yes there are many good people out there doing great research! But the fact still remains: Its disjointed. Joining forces would create a much better front against malware, however that does not exist in a practical manner! Imagine how much better end users would be if the AV industry got together and fought against malware together!

Melih

[triple]

@Melih post:23

And yes there are many good people out there doing great research! But the fact still remains: Its disjointed. Joining forces would create a much better front against malware, however that does not exist in a practical manner! Imagine how much better end users would be if the AV industry got together and fought against malware together!

Melih

Melih

Yes, I could not agree more with you in that case… yes when you all join forces and make a system where you the organizations and the end users will benefit from it, this new collaborated force will destroy all the evil out there and it will make your main goal reality and it will make your slogan a real truth for all internet users!

[Melih]

So who will do it?

Melih

[triple]

@Melih post:25

So who will do it?

Melih

As I like your goal, your organization, and you as a person, I would do it if possible… but you already know I am not in the position to help you create that system… so I am afraid that your question will remain unanswered today… but who knows, maybe you get your answer tomorrow! … or the day after tomorrow… anything is possible… (:WIN)

[Melih]

@triple x post:26

As I like your goal, your organization, and you as a person, I would do it if possible… but you already know I am not in the position to help you create that system… so I am afraid that your question will remain unanswered today… but who knows, maybe you get your answer tomorrow! … or the day after tomorrow… anything is possible… (:WIN)

Someone has to initiate this right?
Somoene has to say “hey this is not working and it would be great if we did it this way for the sake and security of end users” ,right?

I am taking that responsibility, cos after 25 years of fighting malware the industry doesn’t have a solution and people still get infected even though they use industry’s AV products!

That is why I am very vocal about this, cos I care and I want to do something about it.

Melih

[rejzor]

Well, to be honest, you have to be a really hardcore careless user to get infected in any way with lets say AVIRA or Kaspersky.
I’m not gonna say it’s not impossible to get infected, but what is 100% these days? Bulletproof wests are not a guarantee that you’ll not be killed, seatbelts and airbags are also not 100% in car crashes and so aren’t antiviruses.
But some sure pack some punch and keep the risk to very very minimal.

[system]

@Melih post:27

Someone has to initiate this right?
Somoene has to say “hey this is not working and it would be great if we did it this way for the sake and security of end users” ,right?

I am taking that responsibility, cos after 25 years of fighting malware the industry doesn’t have a solution and people still get infected even though they use industry’s AV products!

That is why I am very vocal about this, cos I care and I want to do something about it.

Melih

Hi Melih, regardless of prior comments from some of our distinguished members, I fully understand what your goals are although difficult in light of other peoples’ views and convictions, yours are of heart of something you truly feel and moreover especially perceive as attainable for everybody’s benefit in the long run, too bad others don’t quite have the total insight of your personal goals and convictions as the world would be safer to some extent if everybody thought as you do if only we could learn to TRUST one another again as it once was long ago… :-TU

Appreciatively
Cheers & never give up!!! (:HUG)
Regards
Xman (:KWL)

[Mohan]

Old jungle saying - well not really, read it in some philosophical or management book.

Will it / Beleive in it; and the world will conspire to make to it happen.

Melih, just believe in yourself and the team, and we beleive in you.

Cheers

[Melih]

Thank you guys. I really appreciate the encouraging words.

thanks
Melih

[system]

Melih, you’re more than welcome after all the heartfelt efforts you’ve provided to all of us, keep the vision alive…
Xman :■■■■
P.S. And don’t give your adversaries the time of day Melih, stay true to your intentions and convictions you will in time succeed where others hoped to succeed but faltered and above all of this don’t do it with vengeance because you are a visionary but rather do it with purpose in mind as I know this is the ultimate goal you are aiming to achieve, truly & sincerely…
:-TU :-TU :-TU :-TU :-TU :BNC

[system]

Anyway, you should NEVER Rely on your AV as your first line of Defense. You need Prevention for your first line of Defense, CFP 3/w D+ does a good job of that. No AV can catch 100% malware out there, Tested or not, Even the testers don’t have all the malware in the world.

Josh

[system]

Agreed Josh, I went back to Rising Free Av for purpose and not by whim as I have complete faith in what Comodo is trying to achieve and they will succeed because the will and especially the purpose drives them on and I’m anxious for their progress and when the time comes then I’ll come back to confirm CAVS3 effectiveness in the meantime their firewall is the software firewall :-TU :-TU :-TU :-TU :-TU
Cheers :■■■■ :BNC
Regards
Xman (:KWL)

[Kyle142]

Melih look at all of these forums members, We all believe you can do it. (L)
You have the head, The heart and the support to push you where others have not gone before and make a change for the best. Trust

[system]

Hi Kyle, and you know as well as I do that they will do it!
Regards Xman (:KWL)

[solcroft]

@Melih post:14

Here:

https://forums.comodo.com/general_discussion_off_topic_anything_and_everything/open_letter_to_andreas_clementi_httpwwwavcomparativesorg-t27537.0.html

Its a very simple solution: Ask them to give us their malware library.

1. The malware library is not copyrighted as such (eg: not their code)
2. The direct beneficiary will be millions of end users because this is a free product
3. Why hide a nasty code that could cause a damage to end users from very people who want to protect them?

So why would’t they give us the malware library? Who would benefit from not allowing us to protect millions of users?

Melih

Melih,

Blaming testers for the poor results of your products is not only very telling of the quality of your product, but that of your research team as well.

Work on improving your detection rates beyond 10%, and perhaps you’ll be in a better position to demand that other people help you.

[Kyle142]

Solcroft, The end result is that the end user (You and me) will not have a larger database. I think that if testors really did care about the users they would hand over the samples to trusted antivirus companies to better help the end users.

[solcroft]

Whether or not testers are Care Bears are irrelevant. As long as they provide (reasonably) accurate and unbiased testing using a (reasonably) fair methodologies and rating systems, there’s no reason to try to shift the focus on them. I believe this thread is about CAV3’s detection rates, not whether testers care about users or not.

But just to prove my point, refer to the first post in this thread to see how CAV3 detected 134 samples out of a total of 1272. All undetected samples have been forwarded to Comodo immediately after the test, via channels sanctioned and recommended by the company itself. Out of curiosity I rescanned the samples again using the latest virus database (29th Sept), and this time CAV3 detected 166 samples.

A 3% improvement after almost 3 weeks. Perhaps the problem isn’t with testers not sending their samples to Comodo at all. Besides, is Comodo’s improvement in test results so reliant on testers sending Comodo the samples used in the tests? Again, I think this reveals a lot about CAV3.

[solcroft]

If you think about it, handing out malware samples to antivirus vendors would be what testers do if they cared about money first and foremost. Antivirus vendors have vested commercial interests in performing well in tests they participate in; it would make no sense in forking out testing fees and yet have their reputation dented by poor results.

If testers want money, their priority would be to encourage vendor participation (which, of course, translates to testing fees), and this is done by handing out samples all around so everyone achieves a 99% detection rate. AV-Comparatives gained nothing when DrWeb, Panda and F-PROT decided to boycott their testing, and neither did Virus Bulletin when Trend Micro did theirs. Revenue, reputation as a renowned independent tester, and public trust all go down. I’m not a professional tester; I merely collect malware as a hobby, and I can’t say I know all the insider tricks of the trade. But I do think that Melih trying to take the moral high ground and blaming testers for CAV3’s poor results is way off the mark.

Last, but not least, it’s a poorly-kept secret that while corporate marketing leaders of antivirus vendors are often competing with each other, individual researchers and technical staff often collaborate and share samples among themselves and those they trust to be of integrity and professionalism. It makes me wonder why Comodo doesn’t seem to be part of this network.