COMODO ANTIVIRUS VS others on-demands. (SAS, A2, AVIRA, MBAM) TESTing =)

Well I took myself the freedom to RUN CIS 3.9 BETA vs some malware’s…
Similar testing to the ones done by darcjrt, just much smaller ;D :)… https://forums.comodo.com/feedbackcommentsannouncementsnews_cis/detection_rate_comparatives_about_cis_and_3rd_party_final_av_products_by_darcjrt-t33392.0.html

ALL VIDEOS FOUND HERE: justdoingsometesting - YouTube
COMODO: - YouTube

MBAM found: 425 samples…
SAS caught 422 samples…
A2 (free) detected 2298 samples (+I don’t think it counted those 3 suspicious files)…
AVIRA got a impressive 2459 found + 3 that it rated suspicious, making it the “winner” in this small testing.

Comodo AV found: 2047 samples! O0 :-TU :■■■■ :comodorocks:
Anyway I would still pick CIS over any of those anyway, since we got D+ that prevents them from doing any harm… =) But I think it was/is interesting statistic, that I thought was worth sharing for some weird reason…

  • I always wanted to put something on youtube! ;D ;D

(All products was put to their highest scanning capabilities, no samples sent to anyone prior to testing, all was updated prior to scan) :-TU :-TU anyway… nuff said…

Enyoy my unprofessional production! (if you like) :stuck_out_tongue: :stuck_out_tongue:

… of 2540 scanned objects. :wink:

???

JW why does each scan have a different number of files scanned?

SAS scanned 2526, detected 422 - 16.7%
Malwarebytes scanned 2420, detected 425 - 17.6%
A2 scanned 3873, detected 2298 - 59.3%
Avira scanned 4118, detected 2459 - 59.7%
Comodo scanned 2540, detected 2047 - 80.5%

80.5% would make Comodo the winner. BTW, how many samples where there?

Lol…

Actually IDK. they were set to scan the same maps… and Its the only maps I got spywares on… ???
I even manually checked folder size to make sure that no scanner removed any file… Maby they count them different somehow. =O or possible some files are skipped by some scanners…

I think maby I could have done some misconfiguration in Avira and A2 that made them scan memory and stuff as well…

I do a check. :-[

Ok… I found out they count them diffrently…

Posting a video soon… =)

Every AV counts it’s number of scanned files different, it doesn’t just reflect the amount of files in a folder but also the objects in files ect.

(:NRD) Hi Monkey boy, i must say, at the moment i think it does not matter much that Cavs detection rate is inferior to Aviras. Why?. Because we all know Cavs is still being worked on and its true detection rate will not show until Cima Heuristics is integrated. I bet they will be similar then,( just my opinion). However Cis has new improved D+ in 3.9 beta and it will stop “Anything” attempting to execute, I have tested this also and it went 100%. Avira is the best of the traditional Avs in as much as it detects around 71% of unknowns and lets the rest (potentially) infect your computer. Couple D+ with Buffer overflow and now Boclean, and Cima in version 4, and i feel by then Avira and others may have met their match( again my opinion) However Comodo needs to keep adapting Cis as Malware is always changing.

Lastly as to your tests, and videos, Nice!, but as Malwarebytes and Sas cant detect viruses like A2 or Avira or Cavs, then that would explain low detection rates as i am sure the samples you used were a mix of viruses/ adware/ spyware, correct me if i am wrong on this.

You may have seen my post Which Av would you choose? which ended up being a hornets nest of opinions,not what i intended, but i tested 500 samples downloaded from SSupdaters forums test centre and Cavs detected 490 out of 500 which was 98%, pretty good on 3.8 heuristics high. Thats why i am pretty confident of further improvements in detection rate when Cima is integrated, as its accepted generally i think that its a big step up from present heuristics, detection rate wise.

Keep the Faith and the good work!.

Regards
Dave1234.

probably true…

There is a video of how 3 scanners count the same file…

I don’t know how I should view this result anymore… ???
Apart from Avira giving this file a “scanned 3 files” it also counted it as 3 baddies found (!) :-\

Counting just got harder… ;D ;D
But at least they scanned the same area. xD

True… I used just any baddie I had… =)

I did this test mostly for fun, I know with CIS the AV is unneeded thanks to D+, (personally I got my AV turned to off). =) I did not do this to tell everyone how CIS is bad in anyway, since I know it rocks…

I did it for “fun”… and to try out youtube… =)

:wink: :slight_smile:

Urm anyway…

I ran a new scan with CIS Heuristic OFF… it found: 2031 obj.
Heuristic HIGH: 2047 obj found.

Guess the advanced heuristic has yet to come in this beta!

(:TNG) (:TNG)

Nice work!!!

Good to know someone is following my steps…JOKING!!! LOL

This is a nice test. Keep up the good work! :-TU :-TU

I choose CIS over any AV or security Suite! I actually installed and cleaned a PC yesterday with CIS!! It was a Sony Vaio with Vista Home Prem 32bit. The client did not even had SP1 installed, so it was kinda infected. She was very happy!!

Even though we appreciate your work, you’ve done it wrong. You can’t count samples like that and then calculate percentage like that.
You have to count the samples by hand, scan them and clean detected and then by hand count the remainings again. Then you can calculate percentage.
Because if there is a self-extract archive package with malware, some antiviruses may count it as 1 file while others will count same thing as 10 files because it contains 10 files inside.
Thats probably the reason why the count number is so different for each.
This doesn’t happen if you use verified and analysed raw samples (the exact executable, without its wrapper, SFX or any other container).

I’m affraid Rejzor is right. Although I must admit I really do like the test but this way we are comparing apples with pears

I guess you guys are right… ;D
Those results got a bit “wrong”, due to the way of my testing.

■■■■ I hate when people do testing wrong…

And here Iam doing it wrong myself… 88) 88)

Anyway thanks for looking at the videos, now I know a bit more about counting samples… :-TU

Did you send any samples to Comodo or Avira previously and where are they from? If many are out of this forum here it’s not fair in any way.

yo! why not replace SAS & MBAM with avast & bitdefender to the test? :-La :-TU
can’t expect SAS & MBAM to keep up in this test since they’re not antivirus

No no samples send to anyone prior to testing. (that would be unfair as hell) ;D None from this forum or avira as well since that would be unfair.

I collected samples from different places, some was downloaded using torrents… 8) 8) others was from blacklisted pages… =) :smiley:

sounds like a plan ganda… =)

I will not do any more testing in the closest time thou. Or who knows… But I have a feeling that it might take a while before and if I do any more tests! xD

Also if I decide to do a new test then I will make sure its done properly! ;D :-TU

And now you send everything that CIS did not detect to Comodo. :wink: :-TU :-La

as far as i kno ,both MBAM and SAS are anti malware so they detect everything. And these results confuse me because in all my test and test ive seen MBAM have always come top. ???

But good job none the less. Hope you sent the missed ones to comodo.

cheers