There are a number of malware tests out there that use a similar methodology.
1. Got some malware somehow
2. Ran some computer programs against it
3. Used unknown/undisclosed\questionable methodology to generate some numbers, but no criticism accepted
4. No science was used in this testing-not even the level of a high school science project
5. Make no claim about the general applicability to any other set of malware but hope you will
6. No academic or professional credentials asserted to assess credibility, or justify running the testing program at all
7. etc of your choice
Differentiate this from the YouTube videos that advertise themselves as "tests" of an extremely small number of samples, but may actually provide some utility as "demonstrations" of capabilities if they don't get too sweeping with the meaning of their videos.
Guerilla testing? Wankers with Windows? Well meaning amateurs? All out there. Professionalism?
Some of this can be useful if it provides enough information to help the vendors improve their product. If it is used to convince users to select a product, shame on them for their lack of disclosure and discussion.
