May 32 or 3 days with NOD
ESET NOD32 received the 50th certificate of VB100% of the English magazine Virus Bulletin , an almost silver wedding of spouses who love each other affectionately, and Advanced + from the Austrian laboratory of Andreas Klimenti AV-Comparatives - all in three days ...
To be honest, the speed with which industry news reaches the community sometimes leaves much to be desired. Actually, because the post, do not judge strictly.
')
Meanwhile, on May 31, four days ago, the results of the tests of the laboratory of Andreas Klimenti were published, a little later a report was issued about the next anti-virus software testing by the magazine Virus Bulletin.
This time, the VB100% certificate was issued to antiviruses that showed to Ubuntu Linux 8.04LTS Server Edition (Linux users to dance with a tambourine) 100% virus detection combined with zero folds on obviously clean files.
For details here. The results of the Clemente retrospective tests are available on this link .
I repeat, until both of these tests are safely freed from media attention. Russian vendors, obviously, decide how this time to explain this feature up. Oleg Goodilin, senior marketing analyst at Kaspersky Lab, commented on the situation with the AV-Comparatives test as follows: “As a result, we got what we got - the possibilities of proactive protection will again be evaluated solely on this test of heuristics. The retrospective results of KAV 7.0 frankly are not impressive, and this will be an excellent reason for the incandescence of competitors. ” ( punctuation and spelling author preserved ).
Interestingly, the technical release of the 8-ki (aka nine) KIS, which also participated in the testing, reached 42% of the “with maximum emulator settings” detection. With HIPS, the picture improves a little. Andreas mentions that if the eight participated in tests on a common basis, they would receive a guaranteed Advanced. Read more about testing the new product LC here .
With testing VB100%, the situation is no better - “VB100% did not receive: Avast, Kaspersky, Doctor Web, F-Secure, F-Prot and every little thing. the product receives a VB100% if it has 100% on the Wildlist collection (1st column) and no fols (the last column), Dr. Web did not receive all the other columns just because Dr. Web did not receive it because it did not take 16 Wildlist samples and fouled 3 times Kaspersky because 1 time foulsil. reference
So, the mega-joyful and important news for the entire anti-virus community didn’t evoke enthusiastic news on specialized resources and forums, which, however, is not surprising. The direction that has emerged recently to popularize, albeit an average, but its product, albeit average, but its tests, in this case makes itself felt.
We are waiting for Mr. Sharov to once again tell about the priority of treatment for active infection, and in the LC they will nod to the absence of a behavioral blocker from Klimenti’s tests and the irrelevance of the Wild List collection, however, this has already happened . What remains to say - choose the best, choose wisely). Dixi
To be honest, the speed with which industry news reaches the community sometimes leaves much to be desired. Actually, because the post, do not judge strictly.
')
Meanwhile, on May 31, four days ago, the results of the tests of the laboratory of Andreas Klimenti were published, a little later a report was issued about the next anti-virus software testing by the magazine Virus Bulletin.
This time, the VB100% certificate was issued to antiviruses that showed to Ubuntu Linux 8.04LTS Server Edition (Linux users to dance with a tambourine) 100% virus detection combined with zero folds on obviously clean files.
For details here. The results of the Clemente retrospective tests are available on this link .
I repeat, until both of these tests are safely freed from media attention. Russian vendors, obviously, decide how this time to explain this feature up. Oleg Goodilin, senior marketing analyst at Kaspersky Lab, commented on the situation with the AV-Comparatives test as follows: “As a result, we got what we got - the possibilities of proactive protection will again be evaluated solely on this test of heuristics. The retrospective results of KAV 7.0 frankly are not impressive, and this will be an excellent reason for the incandescence of competitors. ” ( punctuation and spelling author preserved ).
Interestingly, the technical release of the 8-ki (aka nine) KIS, which also participated in the testing, reached 42% of the “with maximum emulator settings” detection. With HIPS, the picture improves a little. Andreas mentions that if the eight participated in tests on a common basis, they would receive a guaranteed Advanced. Read more about testing the new product LC here .
With testing VB100%, the situation is no better - “VB100% did not receive: Avast, Kaspersky, Doctor Web, F-Secure, F-Prot and every little thing. the product receives a VB100% if it has 100% on the Wildlist collection (1st column) and no fols (the last column), Dr. Web did not receive all the other columns just because Dr. Web did not receive it because it did not take 16 Wildlist samples and fouled 3 times Kaspersky because 1 time foulsil. reference
So, the mega-joyful and important news for the entire anti-virus community didn’t evoke enthusiastic news on specialized resources and forums, which, however, is not surprising. The direction that has emerged recently to popularize, albeit an average, but its product, albeit average, but its tests, in this case makes itself felt.
We are waiting for Mr. Sharov to once again tell about the priority of treatment for active infection, and in the LC they will nod to the absence of a behavioral blocker from Klimenti’s tests and the irrelevance of the Wild List collection, however, this has already happened . What remains to say - choose the best, choose wisely). Dixi
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/26754/
All Articles