Well then the Joker should provide his apology to Melih. ;D
Behold further:
http://www.scmagazineuk.com/Trend-Micro-to-boycott-security-tests/article/110967/
http://info.drweb.com/show/3489/en
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Security/The-AntiMalware-Certification-Problem/
Please read attentively.
Peace.
Thank you Jaki for the educational material you provided. Thank you for your time and thank you for your efforts to educate people about how to better our security by finding these ample evidence.
The unneccessary behaviour of “you are not testing because you are afraid” is at best silly and unproductive without people trying to understand the reasons I have explained many times before. This is extra silly especially when I have publicly stood against other similar testing organisations when we were no 1 at those tests (and still are if anyone cares to test)!.
I think at this juncture I will rest my case and look forward to someone with a proper methodology and right infrastructure to test “protection” in real time in real PCs. Then I will be the first one to sign up as this service will provide much insight and help to all security vendors.
Melih
If your product is truly great the methodology doesn’t really matter. If you kick ■■■, you kick ■■■ in every way, if you don’t, you don’t.
And your product is FREE so why are you not willing to participate ? What do you have lose ?
I could not have put it better. In that respect I think Comodo should be a member of the AMTSO, God willing, and further along the concept of Dynamic Testing. Melih sometimes people are shooting with their mouth without knowing what they are talking about until they face the facts and then complete silence. Carry on your good work man and I’ve got your back. 
:-TU :-TU
You still don’t get the point. These tests, as they currently are do not provide a real world scenario. DYNAMIC TESTING does and most security vendors agree withe AMTSO. Are you a die-harder Commodus? Your question was pointless.
Peace.
My points are still valid (that’s if you where directly talking to me.) If not then…Goes back to sleep.
I agree 1000 per cent with this :-TU
Have you heard of a thing called “principle”?
I do not believe in this test. Even if i get 100% why should I do it? To mislead people thinking that I can catch 100% of the malware? Don’t you think saying it catches 99% is misleading, knowing that AVs actually miss over 80% of the new malware? (once again, here is some stats from Virustotal
Again, you are missing the point: I stood up against testing with Matousec cos his testing method was flawed, remember we were number 1.
No matter how you look at it: if we get 0% detection at these AV tests, it would be misleading people, if we get 100% detection it would be misleading people.
Why do you want me to participate in something that I do not believe represents reliable method hence lead to misinformation?
Did I ask you to participate in something you do not believe in and called you names? Will you guys grow up and look up for the meaning of the word “principle” please!
Melih
Right seen you are replying to my post I will reply to yours. For a start I have not called you anything so I don’t know where you are going with that. I take on board what you are saying but I am sorry just because you don’t agree with me it does NOT make my point any less valid. Yeah I did and do agree with the statement that if should be tested even if it is on just 1 AV testing site. I respect your views just like I hope you respect mine.
**** (mod edit :-La)
Erm I think your getting a little personal my friend. P.S I have not disrespected anyone but you in getting excited defending someone who is more then able to answer back is a little weird…
I don’t really understand why you don’t test, it still gives a reference point to other products, although there really is no standard way of testing anything, take Firewalls http://www.firewallleaktester.com/ and http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-challenge/results.php have different results. Firewallleaktester claims these to be the top 3 firewalls
Jetico 1.0.1.61 85,2% ADVANCED +
Outpost 3.5.641.6214(458) 74% ADVANCED
Look’n’Stop 2.05p3 74% ADVANCED
and Matousec claims these are
Online Armor Personal Firewall 3.0.0.190 93% 10+ Excellent GET IT NOW! pdf
ico Outpost Security Suite Pro 2009 6.5.2514.381.0685 93% 9 Excellent GET IT NOW! pdf
ico Comodo Internet Security 3.5.55810.432FREE 90% 10+ Very good GET IT NOW! pdf
so really it still boi;s down to who do we beleive and reall for all practical purposes you couldnt go wrong choosing any one of thes 5 Firewalls
For normal surfing on the internet where you are not interested in going to strange sites or downloading illegal products almost any anti virus will do just fine, but it would be interesting to know how Commodo anti virus even stacks up to Antivir, Avast or AVG
:-TU
Don’t ask me where, I don’t remember.
And I’ll look yet for that info, but now I’m little busy!
Those AMTSO guidelines were published November 10, 2008. Does anyone know if any testing organizations are using them in their tests now five months later? It certainly sounds like it won’t be long before tests with the methodology that Melih wants will be available for CIS submission.
http://www.amtso.org/press/20-amtsotestingguidelines.html
“As anti-malware solutions become more complex, many existing tests are unable to evaluate product effectiveness properly, resulting in product reviews that are sometimes incomplete, inaccurate and misleading.”
And the above statement was made by this organisation supported by all these AV companies, including the av comparitives themselves!
So why are these testing sites continue to promote and publish these product reviews that according to themselves incomplete, inaccurate and misleading is beyond me!
Melih
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!
To each and every poster within this topic - please follow the T&C of these forums - remain respectful and do not post personal attacks.
Jaki you say only die hards will carry on further.
Well Guess what?
I am a die hard,but I address my speech to the master,not the slave.
Melih,Hoss fly,I dont what you do to this pack of drones,but it is the envy of ever tin-pot dictator and con man on this earth.
First this commodus guy is all up on his hind legs,defending his point,there is a brief exchange between the two of you,and he is back peddling like a bleeding seal in a great white tank.
He is NEVER going to have the stones to ask about the:
BTW Melih, how about providing those 100 malware you promised that can bypass GData + Online Armor + SAS and MBAM but not bypass CIS http://www.instantssl.com/
I will give you a peace of paper with 20 $ written on it (in green by the way) and you’ll just have to take it Wink if you provide that malware "
I mean he is probably trembling like his namesake that he ever dared show such iimpertanence .
But I am not.
How about it Abdulhayoglu?
We know how CIS is going to pass.
Just click “deny” on defence+ ever time,while you pretend you dont already know its malware,because you are testing it.
But I would really like to see it (them) defeat GData+online armor+SAS.
Hell just the first two.
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.
AV-Comparatives, VB and others are not perfect. We KNOW that ! Just take a look at the debates after each on-demand test. But they are not useless. They give users an indication on how well a product performs and what they can expect from it.
Melih, COMODO forum users may take your word that CIS is the best, but we have 68000 members, while as you say CIS is being used by 17 million people. They want to know how you stack up.
You don’t believe in those tests - okay, but let others decide if they are misleading or not, just participate !
Many users chose COMODO, because they saw the test results at Matousec. We can see that COMODO gets top marks there continuesly, so we know it’s trustworthy application.
Again, I repeat myself - your product is FREE so what do you have to lose ?
First this commodus guy is all up on his hind legs,defending his point,there is a brief exchange between the two of you,and he is back peddling like a bleeding seal in a great white tank. He is NEVER going to have the stones to ask about the:BTW Melih, how about providing those 100 malware you promised that can bypass GData + Online Armor + SAS and MBAM but not bypass CIS http://www.instantssl.com/
I will give you a peace of paper with 20 $ written on it (in green by the way) and you’ll just have to take it Wink if you provide that malware "
I mean he is probably trembling like his namesake that he ever dared show such iimpertanence .
But I am not.
How about it Abdulhayoglu?
I don’t get that. But I don’t care
Yes it’s free but it’s still about business… “Creating Trust Online” takes us back to the core of Comodo.
I guess I’m somewhere in between the two opinions (are there only two? :D) in this thread, though leaning mostly towards Melih’s point.