Anonymous
Unregistered
http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2237252/microsoft-bristles-over-failed-antivirus-test
Microsoft bristles over failed antivirus test
Microsoft has fired back at a security software testing firm that failed two of its antivirus suites.
AV-Test recently gave Microsoft's Security Essentials and Forefront Endpoint Protection programs low scores for their antivirus protection potential. Microsoft has now fired back at the firm's claims by decrying their method for testing.
mikiem2
Moderator
Well, you can get some interesting data over at shadowserver.org -- from their Viruses page:
"It is difficult to not compare one vendor to the next due to how we have the data structured on the pages. It would be impossible not to try and derive conclusions from those results. While that is the case, our goal is not to create a real comparison site for everyone to try and compete to see which AV vendor is better than the next. There are a multitude of those already, each of which have their own sets of malware to test and rules that they follow for complete their testing. That is not our purpose. We do not have a specific set of malware to test. We instead gather in new malware daily and test it against the different vendors.The versions of AV engines that we have are as new as the vendor can provide us and updated at least hourly if not more frequently. But they are gateway or fileserver products for the most part. We do have plans for using full consumer AV applications as well, but that will take time and much more in donations to allow us to build the back end for that. We will get to it, just not today. "
At the moment Microsoft's yearly stats are at 65.8619 %, their 180 day stats are 70.2719 %, their 90 day stats are 79.0509 %, 60 DAY 83.0405 %, Monthly 81.2884 %, Weekly 70.7138 %, & Daily 81.9642 %. While I was looking through their data the last few minutes it updated, & figures changed, so this really seems a dynamic, very real world view. For reference the winner [if you can call it that] had a 90+ % detection rate in the 90 day & shorter periods.
Check it out yourself & you'll see Microsoft is neither near 1st nor last place, so while they have a right to complain, perhaps they're blowing their own horn a bit too loudly. :)
Anonymous
Unregistered
Vista, Windows 7 & 8 come out and Microsoft Antivirus not so good ?
http://www.av-comparatives.org/
http://www.av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews/false-alarm-tests
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antivirus_software#Problems_caused_by_false_positives
http://www.virusbtn.com/index (Old test may to Dec) Microsoft 1/2 way
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/RAP/RAP-quadrant-May-Dec12-1200.jpg
http://www.mrg-effitas.com/current-tests/flash-test-results/
Microsoft Last
Reproduced with permission. See https://zeustracker.abuse.ch
ii Based on testing conducted over a three month period
iii The actual age as measured from when a binary is crated is largely irrelevant. For the purpose of testing and
research, age is measuring the time binaries are in the wild
iv See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUnZMwXCkyw
v The simulator and all testing was independently monitored and verified by S21sec http://www.s21sec.com
vi Blacklisting encompasses malicious URL lists and binary signatures
BBC Click "Zeus" Special investigation into the latest threats to online banking and internet transactions. "The Man In The Browser"
You must log in to post.
