Would you like to see comodo participate in Av-comparitives?

Hey guys, Since comodo is said to be community driven, I’d like to get a rough idea how many people would like to see comodo participate in AV-C. I’ve heard lots of people wanting it and some not wanting it, I’d like to look at some numbers :slight_smile:


Ofcourse, AV-C tests (at the moment) only test on-demand scanning, So Defense+ won’t be tested. We already know Defense+ is rock solid.
Though, I would like the AV to be tested.

Would you like Comodo AV to be tested? Or not?
What say you? :slight_smile:

I voted yes, only because I have faith in Comodo to come out in the top tier if not the top. A lot of the anti Comodo lot are acting on vested interests and this would be a surefire way to shut them up and make a lot of people question why they should be paying for something Comodo does better and gratis. In the long run it also makes them create better products and us the consumer ultimately safer.

I voted yes too.

Yes ofcourse, if comodo passes that test then it will increase the reputation of comodo in minds of many people, me included.
I personally trust only comodo internet security to protect me but still i would be happy to see how comodo performed in Av-comparitives test.

Yep as I don’t know why people are running scared of it, as the same things that certain people are running from, other AV companies have overcome. If CIS has a good showing then that can only help CIS’s cause. Please note I am not saying a great showing just a good showing maybe upper mid table which might give a much needed kick that might help the AV improve so it’s win win really.

YES!!! i want to know how comodo works :slight_smile:

Yes it should.
But others are paid product, If Comodo get a better result than them, Will it fair ?

49:3 :o
Can some of the no voters please express why?

I see CIS as a whole. If you leave D+ out the AV looks naked to me.
Maybe with version 4…

Greetins all,

Ofcourse, AV-C tests (at the moment) only test on-demand scanning. So Defense+ won't be tested.

Hi Kyle,

… and that’s how it should be if any test of any AV is performed.
Needless to say that Defense + is part of the Firewall as it’s implemented.

As for any AVs, my opinion is:

even if they have additional services, there should be separate (pure) on-demand scanning test and overall tests that includes all other goodies that any given AV provides.
Plus I think that it would be very interesting and correct to test pure Signature detection (heuristics OFF) and the same test with Heuristics ON for any given AV.

Another issue that was discussed here in the forum – we really don’t know what are the standards of testing… and there are other and many issues like including outdated versions / DBs (signatures), even including pure Behavioural Blockers into Firewall tests … etc.

I may agree though, as you said - we all

…like to look at some numbers

Then, as it was pointed many times by many (including Melih) the AV (any) is that unfortunate thing that we are using and that is not an answer nowadays.
The small percentage of differences doesn’t really matter and we all know why.

Finally, after all that been said
I cannot vote No (honestly, I don’t understand why one would vote that way?)
I cannot vote Yes, because I am not using Comodo’s AV and most likely never will;

Where I am getting at – there should be another item in the poll, which is:
“I don’t care”. That one I would click :wink:


I’ll add that option in for you :slight_smile:

;D thanks Kyle… don’t take it seriously…


*** added *** Oh! it’s already there… in this case I voted :smiley:

Thanks kyle, I voted now too. CIS is about much more than an av.

how about a poll to see what people prefer?

AMTSO Compliant test = Industry Standard (accepted by almost all AV companies including testing organisations (incl av comparitives)), which fully tests a product’s capability and NOT just having a folder with malware to see which ones are detected from a limited (very limited) number of malware set which in no way represent the real malware out there plus does NOT measure how WELL you will be “PROTECTED” by “PREVENTING” malware from coming in or not.

These tests do NOT test if the application will “PREVENT/PROTECT” you from malware or not. It merely measures if you can recognize an “INACTIVE MALWARE”. Yep…that malware that sits in your folder is “INACTIVE”…

So what do you want to test?

  1. How well your Security product identifies "INACTIVE MALWARE’ that sits “HARMLESSLY IN YOUR FOLDER”


You see, that is why AMTSO was created…cos everyone in the industry knows these Static tests are nothing but identifying “INACTIVE MALWARE”.


I want CIS and other security programs get tested in 2 ways:

  • how wel do they fight inactive malware (not AMTSO compliant)
  • how wel do they fight active malware in real-time (AMTSO compliant)

analyze all the data and compare the programs against each other! :wink:

want CIS and other security programs get tested in 2 ways:
  • how wel do they fight inactive malware (not AMTSO compliant)
  • how wel do they fight active malware in real-time (AMTSO compliant)

analyze all the data and compare the programs against each other!

+1 :wink:

avcomparatives test also dynamic test if comodo tells them. see http://www.av-comparatives.org/forum/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=949
active/inactive has no thing to do with amtos (also explained in avcomparitives forum)
i want comodo ask them to get tested in dynamic test. and also in normal test.

how do u fight inactive malware?
There is no fighting needed for inactive malware…


is their dynamic test AMTSO compliant?
If not why not? Cos they are a member of AMTSO organisation.
Why would they register and agree to AMTSO testing guidelines but only not to follow it?


Oh Melih, always the same…

It is getting boring. Why are you looking so envious to other vendors and flaming against av-comparatives? They are doing the best tests I think. And as I can see the tests are AMTSO compliant. (do you even know what AMTSO does or you only registered to it??) To me it seems clear that you continue to use the compliance argument to avoid independent tests, while you know (i hope you do) that amtso compliance means following the fundamental principles and nothing more.

If I would be you, I would stop flaming, it could backfire to you. If you do not fear a test of your product tell to independent/professional testers (like AV-Test, AV-Comparatives, VirusBulletin, NSSLabs, etc.) that you want a dynamic test and how the test should be done (according to your understanding of a real dynamic test, otherwise you would probably just criticize them afterwards if CIS does not score well).