Author Topic: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010  (Read 32380 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

bo.elam

  • Guest
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #45 on: June 10, 2010, 03:48:07 AM »
Reality is hard but I believe this tests more than the ones that
show the same applications scoring 98.5% or whatever. I like
Avast so I am not going anywhere but to be almost 100% safe
we need to combine Avast with some other layer of security. I
personally like virtualization/policy sandboxing or HIPS.
In my opinion if you only use a AV and Firewall then its just a
matter of time before you get infected again.
Bo

Offline DavidR

  • Avast √úberevangelist
  • Certainly Bot
  • *****
  • Posts: 86126
  • No support PMs thanks
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #46 on: June 10, 2010, 03:58:03 AM »
I suggest you read kubecj's posts again, starting on reply #35 http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=60554.msg511199#msg511199 as the on-demand scans don't reflect real life use as heuristic, generic and behavioural scanning won't be running as they are in the real-time on=access scanners.
Windows 10 Home 64bit/ Acer Aspire F15/ Intel Core i5 7200U 2.5GHz, 8GB DDR4 memory, 256GB SSD, 1TB HDD/ avast! free 21.11.2500 (build 21.11.6809.528) UI 1.0.683/ Firefox, uBlock Origin, uMatrix/ MailWasher Pro/ Avast! Mobile Security

Henrique - RJ

  • Guest
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #47 on: June 10, 2010, 04:25:31 AM »
It does not help that the samples be sent to Alwill and it not take advantage.

Brazilian Hackers create new trojans every day (and many repeated and similar) and Avast detects nothing while Avira detects almost everyone.

Sent also other types of trojans and adware and Alwill arrives to ignore them.

Other malware will take days to be detected by Avast though it already has sent.

Very tiring task of this "malware hunter" and almost fruitless.

Alwill needs to improve its automated methods of analysis (sandbox analysis?).

AVG (Grisoft) is in the same situation.

I'm not a workaholic.

bo.elam

  • Guest
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #48 on: June 10, 2010, 05:51:50 AM »
Hi Davidr, I hope kubecj is right because I need Avast real time
more than as a scanner. The scanner dont do nothing for me other
than for scanning files I download to my hard drive. I am very happy
using Avast so please don't get me wrong but I dont believe at all
the tests were the applications(all antivirus) score above 80%. I am
sure Avast is better than it shows here and I wish  that not only
Avast but all AV get better.
Bo 

Offline JuninhoSlo

  • Avast Evangelist
  • Advanced Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 849
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #49 on: June 10, 2010, 06:49:45 AM »
No more sending samples to Alwil.

The samples are underutilized and even ignored.

I'm tired.

 :(

Please don,t give up.  ;)

Offline Marc57

  • Avast Evangelist
  • Super Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 1944
  • KISS Rules The World!!!
    • KISS Army
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #50 on: June 10, 2010, 08:16:49 AM »
No more sending samples to Alwil.

The samples are underutilized and even ignored.

I'm tired.

 :(

Please don,t give up.  ;)


I agree, Don't give up. On one of the other forums I go to someone posted their "Malware collection" which was over 65MB and over 400 files. I sent this to MSE,Avast and several others. The point is, This isn't a game, I don't care who's got the best this or that. It's about KEEPING PEOPLE SAFE no matter which A/V they use.

If your going to be a "Malware Fighter", Fight for everyone.
You Wanted the Best You Got the Best the Hottest Band in the World KISS!!!

Offline SpeedyPC

  • Avast Evangelist
  • Massive Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3349
  • Avast shall conquer the whole world
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #51 on: June 10, 2010, 08:18:36 AM »
One thing for sure not sending them at all will ensure there is zero possibility of anything being done at all.
+1
Henrique, don't give up, please. I'm also interested in avast protection - as a lot of other Brazilians - and we're seeing that Avira is forward compared to avast. But, I still have hope...

+1


If your going to be a "Malware Fighter", Fight for everyone.


+1
« Last Edit: June 10, 2010, 08:23:06 AM by SpeedyPC »
ASUS G75VX-T4153H | Avast Premium v21.9.2493 | Avast SecureLine VPN | Avast Secure Browser | Avast Driver Updater | Avast BreachGuard | W8.1 64bit | Firefox 64bit | Thunderbird 64bit | MBAM Premium | Adguard Premium | CryptoPrevent Premium | CCleaner Portable | MCShield | Macrium Reflect | 7-Zip

Offline RejZoR

  • Polymorphic Sheep
  • Serious Graphoman
  • *****
  • Posts: 9391
  • We are supersheep, resistance is futile!
    • RejZoR's Flock of Sheep
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #52 on: June 10, 2010, 08:59:54 AM »
I'm hoping maxx will make more "SuspBehav" rules. The dynamic translation emulation engine seems to be very promising since it's really fast and flexible. It just needs more rules so it will cover more stuff. It might take some time for them to make these rules guess.
Visit my webpage Angry Sheep Blog

Offline mikaelrask

  • Avast Evangelist
  • Super Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 1557
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #53 on: June 10, 2010, 10:20:55 AM »
There will be always an excuse ::)
When we pass it good. We're the best!
When we fail. The test is not so good ;D
Keep improving.

+1

+10
Windows 8.1 amd a10-5700 64 bit
12 GB ram 1 tb hard drive. Avast 18, MBAM

SafeSurf

  • Guest
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #54 on: June 10, 2010, 10:28:51 AM »
Totally agree.  I can't beat +10  ;).

Offline Shiw Liang

  • Avast Evangelist
  • Super Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 1436
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #55 on: June 10, 2010, 07:14:54 PM »
Go avast team!!!
Next time you're going to make the result unbelievable to the max :)

JerryM

  • Guest
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #56 on: June 10, 2010, 09:39:31 PM »
Now that is optimism.  ;D

Avast is a good company, and the product will improve. I continue to think that the whole product dynamic tests are the most meaningful. In the last one, Avast tied for third over some well respected AVs.

I think this retro test is the least useful to me.

Regards,
Jerry

Dch48

  • Guest
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #57 on: June 10, 2010, 10:19:07 PM »
Now that is optimism.  ;D

Avast is a good company, and the product will improve. I continue to think that the whole product dynamic tests are the most meaningful. In the last one, Avast tied for third over some well respected AVs.

I think this retro test is the least useful to me.

Regards,
Jerry
I agree, the retro test is bad because it doesn't include all of the weapons that the products use against new malware. Such as the Behavior Shield which has been improved since the version of Avast! that they tested with.

llariel

  • Guest
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #58 on: June 11, 2010, 01:45:51 AM »
It is just as important for an AV to keep up with new malware by updating it's signatures as it is to detect new things. They say in the test that they used the same signature base from February that they used back then for the other test. Also notice that the version of Avast! used is not the latest one and they admit that behavior analysis was not used. The second fact pretty much nullifies the test results for me. If they tested the latest version with the latest signatures, I'm sure every sample would have been detected. Even the latest version with the February signatures would probably do better. I don't think we can give these results much credibility when they used a version of Avast! that is at least two updates behind.

This is the problem. Today, you can not rely only on the signatures a day. Since there are too many threats that are created daily. It is therefore not to use the signatures for direct detection. Make more use of heuristics in order to detect any threat that relates to any of the thousands of signatures. An antivirus software usually has 90-97% detection of a signature database. This is why we must abandon the direct comparison with signatures. Therefore, MSE had a higher rate than avast. Because realtime-protection is based on behavior & heuristic and not in direct comparison.

Cassy

  • Guest
Re: Av-Comparative Retrospective/Proactive Test May 2010
« Reply #59 on: June 11, 2010, 10:24:10 AM »
All the results I read about say Avira has a slightly higher detection rate than Avast! but with far more FP's. I'll take the very slightly lower detection rate without the FP's any day.
If, after complaining about AV lab tests, anyone is interested in years of real-world experience:

I have been using the free version of Avira for years, variously on 1 to 3 machines, except for a few months trying to use Avast, and a few VERY short tests of other AVs.  In all of those many years, Avira has produced about 4 or 5 false positives.  All were connected with websites, and none have been in the past year or so.  I mostly use Avira with its default scan settings + pre-scan rootkit detection.

If you want to complain about FPs:
I addition to using Avira for background monitoring and daily full disk scans, I also use the free emsisoft (formerly asquared) command-line scanner for daily scans, because of Avira's known weaknesses in detecting more sophisticated non-virus infestations.  Emsisoft produces several FPs a week, usually identifying well known old programs which have been unchanged on my systems for years as trojans.  No sooner do they correct one - sometimes after several days - than it will identify some other unchanged old program as a trojan.

Good luck.
C.