[Merged topic] AV-Test Product Review and Certification Report


Only 9.5 points??? :o ???
No certification…not good… :cry:
Lots of False Positives…

EDIT: But Malware Blocking=100 %. And to me, this is the most important! :-TU :slight_smile:

Yes and here is what reply you will get.lol


What a dodgy website. Says “the page does not exist” if you try to follow the link from here. Obviously some stupid Referer checking.


Real World Testing… Oh The Irony!

what the point to flame av test …
i do not get it.

AV-TEST is not very good AV testing company IMHO. AV-comparatives are IMHO much better. When you open the PDF, the first part is Protection, Blocking is 100! but it got score 3/6, WTH? For example MSE 1 is much worse and gets score 2.5/6. And still gets certified because it is so easy to use. Usability score is somewhat silly and not useful for testing effectivity of AV/security suite. I wonder if AV-comparatives will some day test CIS.

they test the antivirus … not the suit … and comodo lose …

I doubt their methods of scoring. It was protection test of full suites. See AVG suite, AVIRA suite, … Not just AV.

I dont like their scoring of the product. I think if they are testing a suite the scoring should be based on the performance of the full suite (how the full suite performed against the malware) & not the individual layers, thats what the suite are for, to work collectively & not individually.

Its good to show how the AV only part did but this shouldn’t affect the performance of the full suite which blocked all the malwares.

But yes the FP’s are so high & need to be controlled.


Where is Melih? ;D ;D

and What is the difference btw the Protection against 0 day malware (real conditons) and the Dynamic test?

He is still sleeping if I’m not wrong… :wink:
It’s 6:30 AM East Coast.

I would also like to know the difference…

According to the report Comodo did well in the dynamic test and even in the detection test. It did not do quite well for repair and it also had a lot of false positive.

But I must admit that I do not understand this report well. I would have much preferred if Comodo was in AV Comparatives dynamic test.


I think this report is dead on, both both CIS and the other programs.

Yes, if one see the table, he will think that Comodo didn’t do well. But if he see the PDF report he will get to know that Comodo did excellent in terms of protection for what it is meant for. Better than other products.

Though the tester can show how much individual layers blocked & missed but if a suite is reviewed then the score should be based on how the suite did as a whole coz the suites are meant to work collectively with all the layers & not one layer only.


A Security Suite needs to be robust in the sense that it has to be able to:

  1. Protect

  2. Clean (or the company needs to provide a cleaning tool in addition to their main suite) for those who are already infected. Most infected users would not be prepared to reinstall their OS (for a variety of reasons).

  3. Achieve points 1 and 2 with minimal user interaction (especially intellectual effort) and minimal impact on resources.

Security Suites need to satisfy ALL of the above criteria - being strong (or even top) in one does not make them the “BEST” solution (even though it might make them the best for a subset of consumers, like computer experts). It is crucial to understand that people come to computers with different levels of skill and understanding.

You can’t go about trying to educate everyone about computer security - a lot of people just don’t have the time/ don’t care about learning about it. That is why there will always be a demand for a balance of the three criteria.

The areas where Comodo currently does poorly relative to competitors is 2 and 3. This is exactly what these kind of tests outline - it’s not that they are trying to say that Comodo is a bad suite, it is that given an average computer user with average browsing habits, knowledge, etc, there are better choices.

Just because Comodo is great at protection, doesn’t make it the right product for everyone (even though it may be perfect for a lot of those people who frequent this forum). When you look at this forum, most of the people here have above average knowledge when it comes to security.

I really hope that both the developers and the CEO of this company can understand this, and focus their efforts in the right directions.

yes, that is understandable. Problem is, if I trade top protection for quiet ok suite, it is only matter of time my computer gets infected. Sort of missing the point of having the protection software at all. Now we can think, how likely average user can get virus even tho he is not doing anything harmful. It could be, that average user, not browsing regularly bad sites, is ok with quiet signature based antivirus like MSE. I had only one real detection and that was virus on USB stick from my student.

No one put numbers or weights on the trade-off (that is up to each individual tester, and should be a function of the average consumers preferences and information set).

An (extreme) example is that if you trade “useability” for “top protection”, you could be clicking away at thousands of pop-ups - not a practical solution for most users. Many users would happily be infected once or twice rather than render their systems unuseable (in their eyes). This simple example neatly illustrates how users view the two as a trade-off.

By the way, from the point of view of firms, it’s not necessarily the case that the three criteria are truly trade-offs - new technology can improve all of them in the long run.

However in the short run, firms are faced with technological/cost constraints that make these three a trade-off.


I was also trying to stress the same point in all my posts, CIS may look perfect to a sect of more knowledged users (administrators, as we call them), it has almost been impossible to give CIS to any of my friends , my parents themselves have asked me many times to remove CIS from my computer…

Even most other third party reviewers also felt the same about CIS, yes, usability is the main issue that is keeping it away from both Top rating and general suggestion list.

It may be true that Comodo Team strongly suggests, urges it’s customers to have good knowledge and understanding of computers, but, after all, educating the customer or asking him to have high knowledge of what everything in Computer is and how it functions, is not what is expected from a Security Suite.

The comodo devs and CEO need to seriously rethink about it…

they could block these alerts automatically that are currently being displayed , … comodo in terms of usability is the best among it’s competitors , I mean the real ones e.g. OA, OP, Pc tools firewall plus …etc. besides , melih said that they are gonna “issue these alerts”,so the better is still to come.

Melih is here…

Read the report…100% at stopping malware infection, what more do you want from a “protection” product?
:rocks: :110: :viva: