Avast WEBforum
Consumer Products => Avast Free Antivirus / Premium Security (legacy Pro Antivirus, Internet Security, Premier) => Topic started by: Jeleal on April 04, 2008, 01:18:14 AM
-
I just read that Avast 4.7 missed 19 "In The Wild" Viruses in the latest Virus Bulletin test. First of all how did this happen? And second, will 4.8 do be better?
-
Where did you read?
-
Here :)
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=205171
-
probably the avast! team was too hard working on developing the new 4.8 version, so they couldn't improve the virusdatabase ;D
-
A complete list:
- Passed: AEC/Trustport, AVG/Grisoft, Avira, CA (various products), Eset, Fortinet, FRISK, F-Secure, GDATA/AVK, Kaspersky, Kingsoft, Microsoft, MicroWorld/eScan, Redstone (?), Symantec.
- Failed: Agnitum (4 wildlist misses), AhnLab (2 wildlist misses), Alwil/avast! (19 wildlist misses, 1 false positive), BitDefender/SOFTWIN (2 wildlist misses), Bullguard (2 wildlist misses), Doctor Web (47 wildlist misses), Hauri (3 wildlist misses), Ikarus (24 wildlist misses, 6 false positives), K7 Computing (19 wildlist misses, 2 false positives), McAfee (1 wildlist miss), Norman (1 false positive), PC Tools AntiVirus (4 wildlist misses), CAT QuickHeal (2 false positives), Rising (3 wildlist misses, 1 false positive), Security Coverage PC Live (859 wildlist misses, 1 false positive), Sophos (2 wildlist misses), Trend Micro (3 wildlist misses, 2 false positives), VirusBuster (4 wildlist misses), Webroot (2 wildlist misses)
-
Alwil/avast! (19 wildlist misses, 1 false positive) too high :-\
-
Yea i have read it. Alwil/avast! (19 wildlist misses, 1 false positive) thats bad
-
However, what we can never tell from these surveys is the much more important figure of:
How many users of avast got infected ?
How many users of product x got infected ?
How many users of product y got infected ?
All I know for sure is that using avast as realtime protection (and other on demand scanners) not I or any of the users I support has reported a single infection since starting to use avast in 2004.
While I do not want the avast team to think there is not room for improvement I doubt that avast or any other product can exceed the achievement they have for me and the folks I support.
-
Avast! is the ONLY "non intrusive" AV I can use that doesn't slow down my system, and also has painless updates. Still however, 19 ITW misses is VERY BAD and they need to quickly update the signatures and TELL THE USERS they did so..
-
I hope that Vlk will forgive me for quoting a non-public comment but ...
Just FYI, the 19 missed samples were all samples of the same virus.
So, yes, how bad can we make things look if we do not know the facts?
-
I hope that Vlk will forgive me for quoting a non-public comment but ...
Just FYI, the 19 missed samples were all samples of the same virus.
So, yes, how bad can we make things look if we do not know the facts?
and...
how much time, confusion, and wasted energy can be conserved and misunderstandings be eliminated or greatly reduced if we DO in fact, know the facts.... ::)
-
You guys think 19 is bad?
I have ~250 (and growing) sitting in my Virus Chest, all of them waiting for Alwil to add detection for. ::)
-
You guys think 19 is bad?
I have ~250 (and growing) sitting in my Virus Chest, all of them waiting for Alwil to add detection for. ::)
Did you submit them for analysis?
-
Did you submit them for analysis?
Of course. Plus a few new Storm worm variants freshly released yesterday/today.
-
You guys think 19 is bad?
I have ~250 (and growing) sitting in my Virus Chest, all of them waiting for Alwil to add detection for. ::)
Ha ha what a bad day you have solcroft
-
wow 250 not yet added ? may i ask what way You used to sumbit these samples ? ...
-
solcroft: have you configured your SMTP in avast for the same address as in your forum profile?
-
solcroft: have you configured your SMTP in avast for the same address as in your forum profile?
Nope. I used the same settings/credentials provided by my ISP for the SMTP server, and another webmail service that provides SMTP as a backup when my ISP server balks at my trying to send too many files at once.
But to be honest, I don't want Alwil to just suddenly pay attention to the issue when a random user raises it on the forums. I want Alwil to improve in general on its absolutely horrible turnaround time. The Nuwar variants, for example, always prompt a swift response from even ESET who are usually utter laggards, while Alwil allows them to go for days unchecked. But of course, I understand that this improvement is not always possible in the short term...
-
agree.. we have discussed it with evangelists...