VB100 review

Comodo AV and CIS both failed the October 2010 VB100 tests. :frowning:

Mod Edit Removed direct link to results as per site T&C

Bad result… Bad for reputation. But not letting this software go. And really don’t care for test where there is no video. Thanks for the link! :-TU

Yeah, this was the first test , remember.

Mod Edit Removed results screen capture as per site T&C.

Hahaha, it’s funny.The best antivirus(Twister AV) fails too.It’s some kind of stupid review? ;D
Fortinet better than comodo-c’mon, we are not a little stupid kids. :smiley:

Does anyone know the testing methodology they use? I registered and it says that both Comodo AV and CIS had 7 wildlist misses. How many do they test against? Also, it looks like this was tested only under Windows Server 2003.

I also checked and found that Emsisoft failed in April 2010 because of 974 wildlist misses and 1 false positive. That was on Windows XP.

I would really like to know the methodology because I thought Emsisoft was very good. At least that’s the impression I’ve always had of it.

Hmmm… Bad score…

Mod Edit Removed screen capture as per site T&C.

Hmmm… you think that virusbuster is better than symantec, sunbelt and comodo?Well, they got you.:wink:

Just for the record. The only antivirus that got all the latest awards are: avast, Avira, Eset, Sophos
All other fail (at least in one) or did not participate in the tests.

Yeah… AV on Comodo is good based on 0-day tests that someone conducts every single day, so in matter of say, 12 hours most, everyone is already protected. And chances that someone would bust undetected 0-minute malware? So what, autosandbox and D+ should take care of that.
I trust my gut way more than any test org that writes on paper. 88)

Here is how they test for the VB100 award http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/about/100procedure.xml

What’s your take on this, Languy99?

Until I have the actual testing procedures and how they counted the results I would just be guessing. But from what I can tell they tested in two ways, on-demand ( right click scanning) and on-access. What I do know is that in some tests of on-accessing testing the testing organizations counted dropped files as infections even if they were not harmful. But I don’t know if this was the case in this test. I guess Melih will have to let us know.

EDIT, one nice thing is no false positives.


Also, I assume any files that weren’t flagged with Defense+ heuristics were allowed access.

Could be.

What I don’t like is that they don’t list the number of files missed right there in the chart. It just seems strange that it’s either catch them all or fail, even if you missed one.

Hopefully, because I’m curious as well.

Is there any malware that escaped sandbox? No that I know of… So, maybe they counted it as a bypass because AV didn’t see them.

from VB site:

‘Detection’ in this case is accepted if the product clearly marks a file as infected in its log or on-screen display, or denies access to it during on-access testing. If such logging or blocking is unavailable or deemed unusable for test purposes, deletion or attempted disinfection of samples will also be an accepted indicator of detection.

So no Sandbox or D+ at all… They tested only av… 88) Alrighty then… O0

Don’t panic the DACS comes and solves it. :slight_smile:

but now we need to install FortiClient :smiley:

we don’t need DACS or whatsoever to keep us safe , what comodo IS provides is more than enough to keep your PC protected.

A VB100 award means that a product has passed our tests, no more and no less. The failure to attain a VB100 award is not a declaration that a product cannot provide adequate protection in the real world if administered by a professional. VB urges any potential customer, when looking at the VB100 record of any software, not simply to consider passes and fails, but to read the small print in the reviews.