I will tell on another. The harmful program at creation is aimed at any system what or the system is more popular in what or region (here the rights languy99), further the infection becomes appreciable by all regions (you here are right). lunguy99 simply speaks about an early stage of occurrence, and you when all is already started - you speak about different times and don’t want to understand that both of you are right 
Alex
Jaki, your “Malware Travel Advisory Warning” is a little over the top… and especially so, since it was a repetitive message that could have been expressed in a few lines. That’s enough please, thanks.
If you want to discuss what I have said above, then please feel free to PM me. Thank you.
Malware has regional preferences, that’s why for instance DR.WEB that is considered to be a very poor Antivirus is still one of the strongest contenders on the Russian security market. Kaspersky is also very good in detecting malware aiming russian market (for instance trojan bankers that were made exclusively for russian banking system and some russian rogues that lock your system and demand to send SMS ransom to unlock it).
kingsoft and Jiangmin are traditionally strong in China and asia but score very poor in internatinional antivirus tests.
K7 is very strong in India, Ahnlab in South Korea. Trend Micro was once a very strong international contender but now they have a very strong position only in Japan where it was created.
The strong position of all these names on their regional markets prove only one thing that they really good in defending users in these specific areas, otherwise people would not buy them having so many other options, including really good free software.
What do you mean by repetitive? Is this a discussion board or what? What was a little over the top to begin with? Put things into context before you can say that something was over the top. Since I’m being polite and respectful I do not think it is your rights to tell me: This is enough, even as a mod. I’m not doing anything wrong and I did not violate any of the Comodo forums rules, have I?
The only thing I’m doing is to participate in the current discussions with regard to the new PCLS test. When one makes an assertion that the PCLS test was fishy and make grand claim that malware is geographically restrained; of course one must say to that person you are wrong and this is why. And that is exactly what I was doing.
PS: I’m still going to make the same point as long as I do not violate Comdo forums rules. As far as I can tell you, maybe I’m wrong, being repetitive as you put it is NOT a violation of those rules.
Peace.
I read the policies please do tell me which one did I violate?
Peace.
as sarcastic as you are trying to sound you are essentially right. Your sarcasm is not working. You are not blowing anything out of the water, please stop. If I was a traveler to the asian countries I would look for a AV that worked well in both my home part of the world and where I was traveling to know I was protected.
I am still going to test asian software so people who live here have a view of how it works with the malware that is rampent in this part of the world.
mod edit: citation text removed and quote URL modified. kail
Though I believe in regional preferences in malware, I don’t find the results are biased toward Chinese/Asian security software vendors. Most vendors in the top level are non-asian base vendors and there are quite a few of Asian vendors fall in the bottom level.
I just find someone claim the samples could has regional bias and the test is fishy becasue the result has discrepance as compared to his own personal experience. Actually, I feel there is bias in his own perception more than in the test.
With all due respect sir I’m not trying to be sarcastic, far from it; I’m only just trying to show you the implication of your statement.
Sure, go ahead and actually I never said that you could not. The only thing I asked you is to provide a verbal disclaimer in order to forewarn prospective Asian viewers that your samples are Western malware samples and consequently their Asian computer security may fare better with Asian samples. I think it is the honest and fair thing to do, don’t you think?
PS: There are no more fishes to ■■■■ out of water anymore. The pond is completely dried. Your statement that there is something fishy about the PCLS test because the tester has used purported Asian malware samples has no basis. I’m not even sure that you could back up your accusations with evidence. If you have proof please set them forth. Failure to do so would further prove that your statement was just wishful thinking.
Peace.
I applaud your tenacity and now there is now doubt in my mind that you will make CIS the best product it can be. Do not let the result of any test discourage you. Think of it as way to improve and perfect your craft.
Peace.
look in the end my statement is still valid and you can’t say it isn’t. Until they provide a document showing all of the malware they tested you can’t say they are not concentrated on malware that is much more available in the asian market. All I said is that the test seemed fishy because of personal experience all of the Asian AV solutions did not do that well, and having one so high up compared to other big names is a little weird to me. I also suggest you drop this. You have expressed your point of you on what I had to say. That is good enough.
You were the one who claimed that there was something fishy about the test since Jiangmin (A Chinese vendor) did well. So if I understood you well am I to believe that the accused (PCLS Lab) must prove to the accuser (Languy99) that they are an honest broker? I think it is supposed to be the other way around. You made the accusation, please bring your proof. By the way you still have not said whether or not you agree to provide the verbal disclaimer that I mentioned. Credibility, honesty, and fairness are at stake here.
Peace.
Will you please stop, or do I have to move further posts.
If you wish to continue this please use PM’s, email whatever, not posts on the forum.
Thank you
Dennis
Please look here as you appear not to have found your previous post.
Jaki
https://forums.comodo.com/forum-policy-violation-board/pc-security-labs-july-test-t60880.0.html
PS The reason that you’re not getting in-topic answers is because you have been told multiple times to send ■■■ and not to post in-topic. I do hope that is clear.
I think Dr web argument was, and I stand to be corrected, samples that testing organizations such as av-comparatives and virus bulletin were using were actually corrupted (some if not most of them). Dr. Web concluded in the end that some of these samples were not able to cause any infection thus they did not have any signature for them. Also Dr. Web was very keen to have dynamic testing testing available claiming their product would do a better job under a dynamic testing environment where samples are actually executed. So it was not because Dr. Web would do better with Asian samples of Russian samples and poorly with other ones.
Please refer to that html document with regard to Dr. Web: Dr.Web free services to check your links or files
Peace.
I still cannot get a straight answer from all of you mods. Please tell me what policies did I violate? Point me to a forum rule that I violated. So far no mod can tell me. I was told to stop when I replied to languy99 assertions. Just for that I was told to stop. Why? I think mods stick together and have each other’s back right?
Peace.
It is very clearly stated in the cited URL.
Wrong. This action was decided by three Moderators. languy99 was specifically excluded from this process due to his personal involvement.
And since you’ve been told multiple times to stop posting this stuff in-topic and to use PM instead, you are now post banned for 24 hours to allow you think about this & cool down. This time will also be used by the Moderators to determine if any further action is to be taken against you.
It really shows strong bias in your statements. Using your logics, samples in other tests are likely biased towards US/Europe, so there’s bad results in your experience and other non-asia based tests. Your request can be made to all testers but I’ve never noted you have made statements as below;
“Until they provide a document showing all of the malware they tested you can’t say they are not concentrated on malware that is much more available in the US/Europe market.”
I could not have agreed more the bias here is to the superlative. Until languy99 provides the proof that the PCLS Lab test was fishy I’ll still believe that such a test was fair and balanced.
Thanks.
Please sir tell me which is it? First you said I’m sarcastic, second you stated that I’m essentially right and finally you shot yourself in the foot by saying that my sarcasm is not working. Now if my sarcasm is not working then how could I be essentially right?
PS: As an open forum I’m just replying to a post.