I guess this is another example of why CIS is difficult to test. It was built to protect your system efficiently, not merely to detect and remove malware.
MBAM is a program to deal with malware infeccions not a anti-viral program… yes it was a real time protection (its a paid funcionality) but its not concebibed to detected viroses, it’s purpose is to clean infectd machines, witch happens when AV’s fails…
Exactly, MBAM is a malware removal tool. I commented on Youtube (maybe a bit harshly) that his review was what was a waste of time, not MBAM because he didn’t test it right. He says that he will test it now on an infected system. MBAM is meant to clean up what other things miss, not to prevent infections. It is not an anti-virus. It is very nice though that of the things he did test correctly, CAV had the highest detection rate. That’s very impressive. Now if they can sort out and fix the current bogging down and crashing of windows Explorer that has been happening since the last release of a new base file for the definitions, they’ll have something.
I haven’t ever used the real-time functionality, but I don’t understand this. If not to detect malware, what other purpose could any real-time capabilities serve? If the full purpose of the application is to clean already infected machines, no real-time functionality is needed for that. So what does the real-time stuff do?
Sure who can imagine one of the worst AVs detection rate turns into the best :o I want to ask you what is COMODO detection rate now ??? because I know it can even beats Avira :o.
Yes that is true I don’t know what did they exatlly do their AV to make it like this, look it can beats avira and Microsoft security essentials togather I mean MSE and avira both missed 110 ??? viruses and COMODO alone missed only 50 :o viruses WOW that is really amaizing I think properly COMODO internet security 4 will be one of the best AVs in the world note they tested them all by almost 6000 viruses
Comodo still needs to work hard to get a good heuristic engine. I am not to confident in V4 version.
You can’t compare the avira with comodo. Avira have more than 20 years in antivirus business.
I am not saying that Comodo has a bad AV. I am merely saying that it has never been tested by any testing corporation other than the Malware Research Group:
As can be seen it does quite well there. What I would really like to see is Comodo tested by:
Of course AMTSO compliant tests would be best as have been mentioned multiple times in this forum.
All that I meant by my comments is that I cannot recommend that people use an AV for their own defense until it has been rigorously tested by multiple testing corporations.
I do believe that Comodo’s AV is one of the best. I just have yet to see it proven.
I am not saying your AVs is good it is funtastic, amaizing this huge data base is working really great watch how did comodo’s AV perform in this video:ig33ku: Software Test - Virus Detection & Resolution - Comodo Antivirus
you means funtastic 