As said above. I know some magazines like PC Mag review Comodo but why doesn’t comodo join those tests? ???
There was a conflict between comodo and AV-comparatives.
https://forums.comodo.com/melihs-corner-ceo-talkdiscussionsblog/avcomparativesorg-bullying-censorship-and-financial-dealscontinued-t78934.0.html
I am unsure about AV-tests.
but AFAIK there is no any conflicts with other testers
It would be good to know what’s the case with AV-Test. But I think it comes down to money issue for testing.
Also Im-Shady58… Do you trust them?
Everyone seems to put everything on these preposterous tests.Tests are meaningless and indicate nothing.End users are not going to come across a quarter of what ever malware is tested with so the figures and “results” are useless in that respect.
The only test im worried about is if i come across a malware(which is seldom) and my security product deals with it effectively and that is a pass in my book.Its all about money with these testing organisations and the more the vendors pay in then the higher the result.
Are you suggesting that all testing organizations are corrupt? ???
If so I strongly disagree with this. Please provide proof for such a ridiculous statement. I do believe that most of the tests are meaningless, at least for products that are default deny, but I absolutely do not believe that the vast vast majority are corrupt.
How do you know what really goes on behind closed doors with these organisations.
Im not saying they are all corrupt but how many FREE testing organisations are there??
I’m just pointing out that this is not the sort of allegation which can be made without proof.
It is not an allegation it is just an observation.It is how the world works unfortunately.Honestly if we took these tests seriously we would all be using the kaspersky,s and bitdefenders of the world.
it is always a question of how you do interpreting the test results. No Test can show all and no Test can show real world scenarios. So, sure, dont believe all! But they can show nearly a real world scenario if it is a good Test and have the same base for all competitors.
in the most cases you can see in the methodology whether it is a good test (and testorganisiation) or not.
This is not the first thread about this topic.
Caution, I’m keeping an eye on this,
I cannot agree with it.
IMHO not even a quarter but closer to less then 1%. But anyway these tests are useful.
Most probably the scenario you can encounter is tested by these tests.
You need evidence to write such strong statements.
I guess I did…
Totally wrong.
its not wrong at all… there are tests where one vendor pay it and says how must be the methodology for the best result for themselves and who must be the competitors. But that is not the case at all! par example, AV-Test and AV-Comparatives, there is the same base for all! All must pay the same, good methodology and all vendors are agree with the rules if they decide to take part of this tests.
I think the public has a right to know how these “results” are attained seeing as it is the public that will be buying the products .
Are we really supposed to just visit the testing organisation site and view these results and take them ad hoc as they are with no questions asked about how and where they were conducted?
That is just making a mockery of the buying public and treating them like stooges gullible enough to take these results as unsurmountable evidence of the efficiency of a product.
As ive stated before money is at the root of most things in life and testing organisations are not exempt from this and they should make available the methodology of the testing etc.
I for one am not gullible enough to just read these dubious results and purchase a product based on them.
The vendors and testing organisations are well aware that the general public are blindly giving creedence to these unsubstantiated tests and purchasing products based on them.
Its a covert circle involving the vendors and testing organisations to profit as much as possible without giving the public full access to the methods used.
Personally I test myself an AV soft about 1 month on a VM with daily fresh samples … I prefer mine of course …
I think Comodo should - it may benefit Comodo re: more customers
May be I am wrong, but was there not an issue with the Comodo sandbox the company said they could not run the tests with it turned on, therefore the results would be flawed
Sure but Comodo is happy where it is today (25 million installations of Comodo PC security software). AV-Comparatives and Comodo is out of the Q. But we don’t know what’s the deal with AV-Test. Having said that it all comes down to money… Comodo view on it is not to waste cash on such things but instead put it into developing new products/improving products and I agree with that. Also since Comodo don’t really charge for CIS apart from few packages they see no point in paying money for the tests (it’s not a main Comodo income). Matousec is the only exception to this rule (But I don’t have detailed info on it). That’s the view I got from the Comodo side.