Which Av would you choose?

[evil_religion]

Btw: AV Comparatives plans to do comprehensive tests by executing malware samples.
In some cases it also did so in the past, e.g. with KAV 6 PDM or KIS 8.

[system]

What business ?

CIS Pro is covered by COMODO, so if CIS lets malware in, an expert will clean it. It’s not like with others, where you pay 70 $ for a license and when the product fails, you have to pay serious money to get your PC cleaned. So a CIS Pro user could not care less about some test results. They are safe.

CIS Free users on the otherhand wants to know how well the firewall, hips and antivirus performs.

L.A. if you would’t have any test results would you trust CIS as much as you do now ?

[panic]

In the interests of sanity, I’m locking this topic for 24 hours.

Can everyone please take a chill pill and calm down.

Thanks in advance,
Ewen

[Melih]

@The Joker post:96

Hey Melih,

I got your point and in fact you’re right about those tests not executing real malware on a pc! Sorry for the mistake!

You are an honorable man The Joker. Glad to have you in our forums.

thanks
Melih

[Melih]

@Commodus post:99

I still don’t get it ??? If you say that your heuristics is as good as Avira’s and Kaspersky’s COMBINED and you have a very low FP rate, you will rock in every test ! The methodology doesn’t matter.

Can you pls show me where I said the above?

thanks
Melih

[anonymous]

@Melih post:105

Can you pls show me where I said the above?

thanks
Melih

Melih,

I remember seeing a post by you saying that you tested CIMA heuristics against Avira’s and Kaspersky’s.
Here’s a post by EricJH also saying this.

@EricJH post:29

I recall Melih stating that they tested CIS beta heuristics to Avira and Kaspersky and that CIS found 99% of all the stuff the two other programs found together. That is impressive I think.

I’ll put the link in here when I find your original post, Melih.

EDIT
Here it is:

https://forums.comodo.com/feedbackcommentsannouncementsnews_cis/development_activities_for_cis_closed-t31974.0.html;msg232317#msg232317

This is about the current CIS heuristics, though (I think).

[Melih]

I appreciate that. Yes CIMA is powerful but not yet integrated into CIS.

thanks

Melih

[system]

This thread has been unlocked again (Sent a PM to panic). Please stay on topic now guys!

Cheers,
Josh

[patrice58]

Ok I will start it off in a nice manner Melih may I ask you how we the comodo anti virus or CIS users can be sure your program protects as much as say AVG or Avast if you don’t put both products or all the products head to head. (I am not taking about D+ as that is another topic.) If this has been answered before then please point me to where thanks.

[Melih]

@patrice58 post:109

Ok I will start it off in a nice manner Melih may I ask you how we the comodo anti virus or CIS users can be sure your program protects as much as say AVG or Avast if you don’t put both products or all the products head to head. (I am not taking about D+ as that is another topic.) If this has been answered before then please point me to where thanks.

For me to be able to answer that: I need to know which malware AVG or Avast protects. If you let me know all the list of malware they protect from (need the hash of the samples they have pls for comparison), then I will get our guys to compare them with what we protect and I will provide you a list of differences.

This would then show exact differences between these products. We can do this for any other AV if you wish. Please send me the Hash Values of all the malware they detect in a zipped format in a PM. It will then take us about a day to respond with a definitive list.

Thanks

Melih

[Billy_Jack]

@Melih post:110

For me to be able to answer that: I need to know which malware AVG or Avast protects. If you let me know all the list of malware they protect from (need the hash of the samples they have pls for comparison), then I will get our guys to compare them with what we protect and I will provide you a list of differences.

This would then show exact differences between these products. We can do this for any other AV if you wish. Please send me the Hash Values of all the malware they detect in a zipped format in a PM. It will then take us about a day to respond with a definitive list.

Thanks

Melih

And you, as the CEO of a company that makes an anti-virus, would of course, be willing to provide the same hash values of all the malware you detect?

[Melih]

@Billy Jack post:111

And you, as the CEO of a company that makes an anti-virus, would of course, be willing to provide the same hash values of all the malware you detect?

Sure… If the other AV companies asked me to provide it in return for them providing then why not.

Melih

[system]

@Billy Jack post:111

And you, as the CEO of a company that makes an anti-virus, would of course, be willing to provide the same hash values of all the malware you detect?

I don’t understand why you created a new account Cthulhu. Please answer my PM too.

Cheers,
Josh

[panic]

Hey Billy Jack (if that’s what you choose to call yourself today on these forums),

Please check your PM. A response (by PM on these forums, or in a public post on these forums) is not required, but is preferred.

Ewen

[Eduardo]

@Melih post:112

Sure… If the other AV companies asked me to provide it in return for them providing then why not.

Melih

To me that’s not the way if you want to create trust on line.

I disagree with you, and I really wait you change you mind and submit CAV to a public test. AV-Comparatives will introduce Dynamic Tests this year [ http://www.av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews/dynamic-tests ], so getting out of this is really a bad idea.

Don’t submitting your products to a public test like this do more harm than good.

[who_te_fuc]

While I agree with Melih on a lot of points. That the measurements isn’t “the best” or might be a bit wrong. When the reality tells us that AV’s offers as little as 20 % or similar protection against new threats. And that all those fancy 99,8% detection failed millions of users when conflicker was out, something CIS wouldn’t do, and this again showed how BAD today’s AV’s are against new threats. CIS would probably be rated lower at those tests, but protect better against malwares and bc of that those tests are misleading.

Despite this I still believe that even ON-DEMAND tests has some relevance. Even old samples that don’t spread has some relevance. It tells how well CIS would preform DETECTING old threats on a computer about to just install CIS (and many install CIS once their normal AV has failed them). And I think the AV was designed exactly for this, to “help” CIS users that is unable to use the D+ catch baddies anyway.

Wasnt the AV was designed to be a compliment to those that failed using D+ properly, and clicked “yes yes”? Then shouldn’t they get some info on how well this compliment does? =)

And I seems to think that just comparing samples in database would be a bit unfair.
Since AV’s these days also has heuristic…

If all we are willing to be a part of is “first scanning then running the malware” then developing a AV was a total WASTE in my mind… Since you know as well as me that the AV dosn’t provide added protection and isn’t necessary if we look at malwares from that perspective… D+ CAN and WILL catch them all…

Just my thoughts on it… And I have no doubt CAVS is GOOD and will have a Top Notch AV one day… =) But I really would love to see it tested. And I think as The Joker that not getting it tested would do more harm than good.

[Breen]

I think CAV should be tested some day, it is a matter of trust, but not necessary today or tomorrow.

In January Melih posted : “As to the tests…hmmm…I have a plan…”, so CAV will be tested…maybe stable ver 3.9, or maybe 4, Melih will decide, but users need clear delcaration.

[triple]

CIS has nothing to be afraid off, they already have an update page were people can track the progress of CAVS… and so far it is nothing to be afraid off. The test of Darcjt have shown that CAVS was making a great progress and other sites also have shown that CIS with CAVS is very valuable addition to pc security, like the millions of users who are active using CIS! Still, it would be very good if we can see CIS dominating the list in various AV comparitives tests! This will proof that CIS has nothing to hide, which I strongly believe!

[Kyle142]

@patrice58 post:109

Ok I will start it off in a nice manner Melih may I ask you how we the comodo anti virus or CIS users can be sure your program protects as much as say AVG or Avast if you don’t put both products or all the products head to head. (I am not taking about D+ as that is another topic.) If this has been answered before then please point me to where thanks.

@Melih post:110

For me to be able to answer that: I need to know which malware AVG or Avast protects. If you let me know all the list of malware they protect from (need the hash of the samples they have pls for comparison), then I will get our guys to compare them with what we protect and I will provide you a list of differences.

This would then show exact differences between these products. We can do this for any other AV if you wish. Please send me the Hash Values of all the malware they detect in a zipped format in a PM. It will then take us about a day to respond with a definitive list.

Thanks

Melih

My grand mother\father would not understand what that remotely means at all, they’d think it looks like politicians answer and loose trust already. lol

Can you please answer it in a simple, straight to the point so that everyone can understand - why should users protect their pcs with comodo ANTIVIRUS instead of other solutions? (Not in terms of performance or usuability etc… just detection)

[Melih]

@The Joker post:115

To me that’s not the way if you want to create trust on line.

I disagree with you, and I really wait you change you mind and submit CAV to a public test. AV-Comparatives will introduce Dynamic Tests this year [ http://www.av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews/dynamic-tests ], so getting out of this is really a bad idea.

Don’t submitting your products to a public test like this do more harm than good.

I thought we both agreed that the current methods were flawed in the other post and the AMTSO seems promising but today noone is offering it.

Melih