CIS Certifications, Test Results & Reviews

Comodo Internet Security - CIS News / Announcements / Feedback - CIS
584

Avast, AVG, avira as well as Bitdefender uses their own AV engine, or am I wrong?

In either way, nice place :slight_smile:

585

this is what i am seeing, i don’t see them in top 5.

[attachment deleted by admin]

586

Okey :slight_smile:

CIS will get even better in v6. Keep up the good work and be proud of what COMODO releases! :-TU

587

Comodo has the best detection!

[attachment deleted by admin]

588

Excellent!!!

Now even better detection:

[attachment deleted by admin]

589

And av-test.org

It seems like it disappeared from every comparative where it doesn’t get good results.

590

av-test.org is a paid test.

If you want to pay for it, more than happy to take part in it :wink:

Melih

591

Matousec is a paid test too, but Comodo gets good results so it’s ok.
I like Comodo products, but the “I only pay for tests where I get good results” behavior is pretty disturbing.

592

We use Matousec not for testing, but their capability to provide us feedback and new threat vectors so that we can protect you better. Test results are a bonus with Matousec.

what is disturbing is to rely on non-independent test results…
as a consumer you should be wary of “paid tests”.

593

AV-Test May/Jun 2012

http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/mayjun-2012/

http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/test-modules/protection/

594

I don’t understand why some “Local” provider really want achievement for their local market?
Just advertising is better for them. :stuck_out_tongue:

595

What about VB100 ? Why Comodo is no longer in the Proactive/Reactive detection chart ?

596

It’s partly ture; They take paid for additional testing before the 6month period between the non-feed testes.

Their results are a bit strange; they ignore what the engine detects, d+ and they give FP to high value.

597

Where is Comodo?

598

1.Matousec did not test the default configuration of security products.

2.Matousec did not use the popular attacking methods of real malwares, such as .vbs autorun, .cpl malware, “safe .exe+malicious .dll”, “exploit to system applicaitons”,“exploit to QQ software or other IM applications”, …,etc.

:-X

599

[“The products are installed, updated and started up using standard/default settings. The protection program has complete Internet access at all times.”]

http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/test-modules/protection/

600

Only matousec provides the samples of the test.

So, users can use the samples to check the security products.

601

http://www.blog.mrg-effitas.com/mrg-effitas-flash-test-23-07-2012-12-hours-later/#comments

Peace has been restored with MRG Effitas?

602

I don’t think any testing organization actually needs permission to test a product.

603

No any legal issues with the company if it does not like the results of a test?