 | |
| |
| 15 Oct 2010 | #1 |
| | Comodo vs Symantec Background It all began with the following statement by a product manager at Symantec in an article in the Guardian, Can you protect your computer for free?: Quote: Thesis David Hall, a product manager at Symantec: "If you are only relying on free anti-virus in this modern age, you are not getting the protection you need to be able to stay clean and have a reasonable chance of avoiding identity theft … free anti-virus is not enough: you need in-depth layered technologies, which only come from the more mature paid suites." Results (?) According to Melih, I hope you will now stop spreading misinformation Symantec!, Comodo won the challenge. Interestingly, the link that Melih posted in his blog goes not to the test results but merely to AV-Test.org · Tests of Anti-Virus- and Security-Software. So, what shows up at AVTest.org? How about recent tweets by avtestorg:
I've searched the avtest.org site and cannot find the actual results. The closest I come is the PCMag article, Comodo: 'We Beat Norton!', which states: Quote: A closer look at the detailed results reveals that there's more to the story. The test shows that both Comodo and Norton detected and warned about 100 percent of the threats, though Norton got just 90 percent for the "Overall Detection and Blocking Rate". Comodo didn't mention that for the "Overall Detection, Blocking and Removal (Cleaning) Rate" their product scored 53 percent to Norton's 80 percent. Have I mentioned that I have no intentions of ever installing a Comodo product on any computer I own? |
My System Specs | |
| 15 Oct 2010 | #2 |
| | Nice post Corrine |
| My System Specs |
| 15 Oct 2010 | #3 |
| | Thank you. |
| My System Specs |
| . |
| |
| 15 Oct 2010 | #4 |
| | thanks Corrine ! |
| My System Specs |
| 15 Oct 2010 | #5 |
| | Great job Corrine! Thanks for sharing that data with us. Don't forget to clean my windows next Friday! (This is an insider joke) |
| My System Specs |
| 15 Oct 2010 | #6 |
| | 
Quote: Originally Posted by Corrine  Comment Have I mentioned that I have no intentions of ever installing a Comodo product on any computer I own? Which begs the question; What do you use for security? Personally I'm not that adventurous when online. I try to look before I go down the rabbit hole. My Security:
 After reading hackerman1's sig, I also have...2 A/V´s for on demand-scanning. MBAM-free. Super Anti-virius. UAC at mid Firefox with Noscript, AD-Block, Better Privacy. Last edited by Anak; 15 Oct 2010 at 08:24 PM.. Reason: Addendum |
| My System Specs |
| 15 Oct 2010 | #7 |
| | Hi, Anak. I have my favorite WinPatrol PLUS on each computer and licensed MBAM (for testing) available. The Windows Firewall does the trick for me also. Again, for testing, I have Spyware Blaster on one machine and MVPS Hosts File on another. ESET Smart Security on one machine and MSE on another. (I am in the beta programs of both.) I have been fortunate in that I have never had any kind of virus or browser hijack. |
| My System Specs |
| 15 Oct 2010 | #8 |
| | Very interesting post. I did some searching myself, and note that Comodo doesn't even feature in the testing at AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Welcome to AV-Comparatives.org - an independant ant-virus software testing based organisation out of Europe. Have a look at their latest report here : http://www.av-comparatives.org/image...od_aug2010.pdf |
| My System Specs |
| 16 Oct 2010 | #9 |
| |
Quote: Originally Posted by Corrine Quote: A closer look at the detailed results reveals that there's more to the story. The test shows that both Comodo and Norton detected and warned about 100 percent of the threats, though Norton got just 90 percent for the "Overall Detection and Blocking Rate". Comodo didn't mention that for the "Overall Detection, Blocking and Removal (Cleaning) Rate" their product scored 53 percent to Norton's 80 percent. Have I mentioned that I have no intentions of ever installing a Comodo product on any computer I own? Norton failed to mention that while both were able to detect 100% the threats, Norton failed to prevent 10% of them from infecting the system in the first place, while comodo blocked the infections 100% of the time. Here's the results of the test... Attachment 105165 I suspect they're not being published because someone with a lot of money to spend doesn't like the truth. If an AV fails to prevent the infection, it's not really doing it's job. No AV is ever going to be able to remove everything, because the OS has to cooperate in giving the AV permission to change protected files. that's what removal tools are for. Last edited by madtownidiot; 26 Oct 2010 at 09:02 AM.. |
| My System Specs |
| 16 Oct 2010 | #10 |
| | Very nice article. Thanks for sharing.  |
| My System Specs |
 |
Comodo vs Symantec problems?
« Study: Electronic theft surpasses physical theft
|
EmsisoftAntiMalware the ONLY program to detect ALL Malware in a test ! »
| Thread Tools | |
| Similar help and support threads for: Comodo vs Symantec | ||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Uninstalling Symantec | Software | |||
| Symantec pop-up | Software | |||
| Symantec 360 Shared Network Pop-up | Software | |||
| Symantec Ghost v14.0 | Software | |||
| Win7 and Symantec | Software | |||
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:35 PM.
