Avast Free Antivirus 12.4 BETA prevention and detection Test

[Be Secure]

https://malwaretips.com/threads/avast-free-antivirus-12-4-beta-prevention-and-detection-test.65212/

[kenny556]

This is just another prime example of avast adding features that are not working correctly. Yes detection has improved but it's been almost a year and cybercapture is not functional at all. We keep getting told it will improve over time but no real results... could it improve after some parts of avg get added in the program? Yes it's a possibility but bottom line is that we have  not seen any improvement of cybercapture at all. It's almost like the promises of comodo antivirus "It will improve next version" and it never does... I will say this without limitation cybercapture has been a piss poor implementation as a person who tests software myself as the OP I can 100% confirm his results.. cybercapture is useless and broken.

[RejZoR]

One would expect CyberCapture to evolve regularly, not only on big program updates. But it just doesn't feel like it. Like usual...

[kenny556]

 Exactly all promises no results...

[Para-Noid]

CyberCapture is relatively new. Give it some time.
Here is a whole topic about CyberCapture https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=187679.msg1320139#msg1320139

@RejZor Remember the old behavior shield? 

[RejZoR]

Behavior Shield = Fail
AutoSandbox = Fail
DeepScreen = Fail
HIPS = Fail
Lack of any real anti-ransomware = Fail
CyberCapture = Meh

Only thing that seems to actually work and is useful is Hardened Mode (Aggressive). I don't get it how CyberCapture doesn't even get invoked by unknown files, all it invoked for some reason was DeepScreen. Which just passed stuff through. I don't get it. Does it even function?

[kenny556]

Spends 1.6 billion to buy avg yet can't fix cybercapture I don't get it......  @Paranoid I have read all about cybercapture and know how to test it but still no results at all..

[RejZoR]

avast! has this problem for years. They constantly have amazing ideas, but they always seem to fail at finishing the thing and deliver results. Only thing that actually and consistently works is Hardened Mode. Everything else was totally underwhelming, underpowered and almost bordering useless.

[DavidR]

avast! has this problem for years. They constantly have amazing ideas, but they always seem to fail at finishing the thing and deliver results. Only thing that actually and consistently works is Hardened Mode. Everything else was totally underwhelming, underpowered and almost bordering useless.

Yes and then again Hardened mode is off by default if I remember rightly.

So for most people that won't be providing additional protection. Considering the (i) information for it states "This is recommended for inexperienced users."

[Rednose]

Spot on : So why would you rely on blacklisting, if whitelisting offers better protection

Greetz, Red.

[kenny556]

What avast! Needs to do also is enable "PUP adware" by default with in the entire product. One of the old installers if I remember correctly gave us the option to enable it before the install of the product. Some company's are getting tougher on PUPs  including Malwarebytes and windows defender in windows 10. It's time avast follows in this! Any  novice user that installs avast will not go through the settings and enable the detection of potentially unwanted programs it's just not going to happen. Your lucky enough if the  average person keeps their windows updates up-to-date. http://news.softpedia.com/news/microsoft-and-malwarebytes-boost-pup-detection-509196.shtml

[RejZoR]

No, PUP's should NOT be enabled by default because many installers come with toolbars and stuff and since AV's block entire installer if they contain any of such PUP's, I think you can understand the problem. That's why it's not enabled by default. It should be enabled by default for on-demand scans though as there user has a clear choice and time to think about keeping or removing them.

[Dwarden]

I would expect Avast! Browser addons scanner and Avast! itself to report this extension as malware  / dangerous / privacy and security risk 

[Vlk]

Guys,

First of all, thank you for your support and all these discussions. I mean, despite the often harsh tone, it just shows to me that you guys really care -- you really want us to do better! And I'm grateful for that!

The path to success is rarely a straightforward one. Yes, some of the tech we have worked on hasn't quite delivered -- but does it mean we should have not invested in it? I don't think so. Innovation doesn't happen automatically. You need to take many sideways to actually get where you want.

What makes me happy is that overall, we're on a positive trend. You may not realize it unless you see it, but here's our performance in the industry tests in the last 12-18 months. You can see that the trend lines are generally very good. Of course, we'd prefer even faster growth -- and to that end, I'm really excited about the new tech that the AVG engine and processes bring to us. The truth is that the technologies are actually quite incremental, and it looks like the combination will give us a real edge.

The combined engine is not yet present in the beta you're testing, but it WILL be till the end of the year (i.e. in the next ~6 weeks). After that happens, I would like to ask everyone to do a retest and see how we're coping... Until then, please let's discuss the non-detection features of the new Avast.

Thanks again, guys!
Vlk

[Pondus]

The combined engine is not yet present in the beta you're testing, but it WILL be till the end of the year (i.e. in the next ~6 weeks). After that happens, I would like to ask everyone to do a retest and see how we're coping... Until then, please let's discuss the non-detection features of the new Avast.

Does that mean future avast / AVG will have two engines?