When can we expect to see this antivirus tested at av-test or av-comparatives? I want to see how it compares to the likes of Avira, Avast, AVG and MSE. I can’t install an antivirus that doesn’t exist. We seriously need to have it tested otherwise it might not be taken seriously.
:-\
My take on this is that it’s hard to test CAV without having the rest of CIS installed as well. CAV is designed to be a part of the entire package and may not do well strictly on it’s own. If tests were done, the results would be challenged because of this degree of integration into the suite. Within the full suite, CAV does a very good job. I’m not sure if it would on it’s own.
Another factor is that many people, including the testers, would criticize CAV for not scanning emails or web pages, things that are not necessary within the framework of CIS or maybe even not necessary at all. The vast majority of people do not understand that email scanning during downloading is redundant and not needed. Even the major AV providers have admitted this.
or the same as having a web shield, if something is displayed on the browser you can be sure it is also stored in a temp folder on your computer, when it is written there the first time, the security suite will scan it. So in reality there is no point for a web shield.
As I see it the importance of the AV in CIS is to prevent the user from making a poor decision. As this is the main reason for its existence the detection rate of the AV is the most important part.
Because of this I would like to see it tested, but of course Melih will not allow it to be tested until there are AMTSO compliant tests. Other threads have proven that asking when it will be tested will not be able to produce a specific date.
I agree with you 100%. I personally use this AV, but I cannot recommend that anyone else does until it has been properly tested. Hopefully soon, but don’t hold your breath.
Not entirely correct. Anyone who wants to test the AV can test it whether Melih wants it to happen or not. What Melih will not do is pay to have the AV tested.
I don’t care if it’s tested by the current crop of static tests (I’m sure it would do very well - probably not the best, but up there with the best), but would prefer to see CIS as a whole tested in an AMTSO compliant dynamic test, but that beast doesn’t exist yet.
Rather than asking when it will be tested, ask yourself which statement most accurately reflects the attitude of the majority of users;
or
Please don’t accuse me of being a fanboy, but I really don’t believe that any AV (you pick the brand to go in here) should be considered the primary defense mechanism of a PC.
If all the currently available AVs (paid or free, including or excluding Comodo’s) are so bloody good, why is the malware threat growing?
If they all were the effective tool they claim to be, surely the problem would be getting smaller, not larger?
If they all were the effective tool they claim to be, why are all the major AV companies now producing Internet Security suites?
The AV component of CIS is OK as a standalone AV - better than a lot, but not as good as a handful of others. BUT - and it’s a big but - the overall defense strategy of CIS is founded upon each component contributing to the overall security of the system it’s installed.
Each component is good, but the sum is greater than the parts.
The above is just my personal opinion, based on personal perspective and real world usage - not as an offering at the altar of Comodo. Please don’t insult me by starting the “fanboy” ■■■■.
Cheers,
Ewen 
I guess you’re implying that the HIPS is more important than the AV.
Relying mostly on a HIPS won’t mean you’re any more protected than relying solely on an AV. First off, the HIPS would have to know if an action was malicious or not in order to block it. And if it doesn’t know, there are users who will allow the action, not really understanding if it’s malicios or not. Therefore combining ignorant users with a poor antivirus and you have a recipe for disaster that not even the greatest HIPS will stop.
Wouldn’t it make sense then that you’d want something that slips past the HIPS to be detected by the AV? Or think about it this way…rather than relying on the HIPS to stop malware wouldn’t it be even better if the antivirus detected it before it even made it’s way onto your system?
Yes that does make sense which is why CIS works just as you said. If CIS has the signature in it’s database then it will work as you have stated if not HIPS is your first line of Defence(+).
That was exactly my point. As a defense mechanism, an AV IN ISOLATION is no better than a big stick. 
A layered approach consisting of (not in any real order) a mechanism to monitor system entry vectors, a DB of known malware, a means of removing any existing malware and a means of controlling network traffic in and out of your PC. These various components need to co-operatively work to keep a system clean.
Sort of sounds like an internet security suite, doesn’t it.
Testing an AV in isolation is like inspecting the seat belts in a car, while ignoring any other safety mechanisms present, and judging the cars overall safety based on just that.
Or think about it this way...rather than relying on the HIPS to stop malware wouldn't it be even better if the antivirus detected it before it even made it's way onto your system?
“if the antivirus detected it before it even made it’s way onto your system”
What miracle product are you referring to here?
No product can tell if something is good or bad BEFORE it gets to your system. How can it?? 88)
For any form of anti-malware product to do its stuff (regardless of how well it does it), the object to be examined MUST be in the local environment the anti-malware product is in. In memory, or written to the file system, it has to be on or in the PC before the anti-malware product on that system can inspect it.
So-called web shield type products DO NOT do their inspection on the host system - they parse the code and download the referenced objects locally into a protected environment ON YOUR PC and then inspect it.
It simply can’t do it any other way.
Cheers,
Ewen