Malware Research Group CIS V4 malware test

As per my request the malware research group has done a test on the new CIS V4 beta. The results can be found over here = 0x80070643_article_11 – My Blog

it’s nice to see that it can compete with the other big guns. (Only the acid cleaning isn’t working as expected, or isn’t it integrated yet ? )
Let’s hope we can see the same, if not better results in the next tests.

Thank you very much MRG and keep up the good works !

best regards,
eXp

Good to see Comodo is doing this well. Although there were not many samples

Great, the AV is up there scoring almost as well as the big boys (at least in this test)! :slight_smile:

Not much to say, it ended last :'(, still not bad scoring so close to the most respected antivirus scanners out there. The cleaning didn’t work that good, oh well… =)

Well well. Tremendous progress.The gap between the big guns and Cis is getting smaller day by day it seems in terms of detection rate. I put this down to daisy and the generic sigs and also the recent update in Cis which helped detection.

I am confident that when Cima is introduced and the Data base drops further then the gap will maybe not exist at all.Taking into account the Whole suite as its likely to be, with the sandbox and a behavior blocker added, all we need to see is an improvement in the cleaning up of malware as eXPerience said in his post.

Finally i am confident Fps will be minimal via Cima and other improvements, which will allow Cis as a whole to be one of the top Apps in prevention as well as detection and cleaning. All this to come and free too, marvellous!.

Regards
Dave1234.

This test seems to have sparked some debate over at MRG and wilders:

http://malwareresearchgroup.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=291#p904

Fun reading I thought so why not share it… 88) ;D

Wilders are saying: don’t trust MRG. Personally I think wilders is just being silly its “throw a random accusation, see if it sticks” and then: guilty until proven innocent approach like always…

What test can we trust anyway?? Testers like AV-comparatives keep closed doors and uses many samples sent from the AV companies themselves that they later refuses to share…

If that can’t be used to cheat/boost a result… then what can…

When a bad result for PrevX was presented, MRG was willing to prove their innocence… And did unlike some share samples! REPS to them for that.

=)

and more importantly…

Thanks, forgot to give them links as well. :-TU Originally there was one, but then before posting I altered my post some and forgot to add it back again somehow. ???

Typical Wilders and forum members haha. Glad I don’t waste my time there anymore, but it’s still fun to read the jokes from time to time!

I’m sure someone here can test this Backdoor.Win32.NewRest.bc sample from MRG’s “Infected System Rescue test” against a-squared Anti-Malware and Avira AntiVir Premium.
Just two questions…
Is a-squared able to detect the malicious driver?
Is Avira able to remove the malicious driver on reboot?

I have tested a NewRest sample today which behaves exactly like this one:
http://www.threatexpert.com/report.aspx?md5=49bac46a378823a7fb231382efacbe3a
Both failed.

Cheers

It’s funny to see that an admin has so much power over there. Simply because he says Comodo has a connection with the MRG, because we have a board of that ourselves, the MRG is not trustworthy.

Guys, Comodo does NOT receive any malware before any test has been run, nor does it have a connection with them.

oh yeah, and our own MRG is not the same of course ;D

best regards,
eXp

He was giving his opinion… just as we all are now…

It makes me laugh that they make accusations then expect the accused to come up with the evidence to disprove it rather then actually finding any evidence to support there accusations.

Lets not turn this into another wilders bashing thread…

Would be nice if a similar caution could be made at the Wilders forums regarding Comodo and MRG!

Regardless, back on topic, it seems Comodo Antivirus component is continung to improve big time.

For me personally, I’m only interested in an on-demand scanning program which:

  1. Has a high detection rate in most published tests (top 5 will do I guess)
  2. Runs (comprehensive) full system scans fast (my current on-demand scanner completes this in under 10 minutes on a hard-drive which is using about 55% of its 320Gb capacity).
  3. Has a fast and accessible right click context menu option

After spending the last 1-2 years trialling numerous antivirus and on-demand scanners out there, I’m currently sticking with Avira AntiVir Free with Guard not installed, simply because it fulfills the above 3 criteria the best (in my opinion). I will continue to keep a watch out for Comodo Antivirus component though!

I agree,let’s keep this thread confined to this particular test guys.

With regards to this particular test it does appear that the Comodo’s AV is improving,albeit with a small-scale test.
In general though I’m far more interested in the type of malware being detected (and missed),rather than pure percentages.
I’d rate a product higher that blocks the most serious,system destroying,malware;than one which blocks all the less harmful stuff but lets these through.