Now if you look at Comodo’s ranking please don’t go into hysteria that it’s low on detection. This site is just so you can see Comodo working without it’s multilayer protection. They have 100% turned off it’s features and probably just use signatures and cloud detection only.
I got the link from Wilder Security forum and hope Comodo works on it’s signature detection too. It should hover around mid table without all that layer of protection & it’s good to go :-TU
Before this Comodo was in the second list slowly it’s popped up into the 1st list. I like to check on the daily overview of all the different security software out there. Don’t take these tests to heart. It will be nice if Comodo get’s more info on how they test as they stated:
“For professionals in computer security, you can get additional access to our database. Please contact us for more information (labs-AT-crdf-PT-fr).”
Get in touch with them and see what you could improve on or their methods of testing. You can also determine what maybe lacking.
I dont trust this site. Comodo has always low detection on this site. This is not the reason I dont trust this site. The statistics just seems fake to me.
This is a french lab, I always go on this site ( every day ) to see the differences between these engine.
But I don’t like these test very well because it’s just the detection rate “on demand scanning”.
And I don’t think that they have turned on the cloud scanning for Comodo
An italian antivirus tests website…there’s no need to speak italian to understand rsults…in this case the test is about pure detection skills (no necessarily zero-day malwares).
Anyway, like everybody knows (or should know) in spite of low (presumed) zero day malwares detection rate, CIS can protect the computer using D+ and Sandbox…and THIS is the most important thing…
I disagree. Unfortunately there is very little info about the testing other than saying that they use zero-day malware. If you compare these stats with figures published by AV-Comparatives pro-active/retrospective tests they are quite similar which would indicate that like AV-Comparatives they probably measure detection rate by scanning using the AV only. I’m not surprised by Comodo’s average detection rate because CAV has always had mediocre detection rates and it is not Comodo’s primary defense against zero-day malware.
They probably test CAV using its default configuration. If that means cloud scanning is off I am surprised because I can’t see why Comodo would release it that way.
I think I will everyday take the % for comodo and average it with all previous readings from this point on and do the something for the top AV ( no matter what one it is). This will give us a true average while filtering out the anomalies for comodo compared to the top spot.
