AntiVir, 10 others, fail Virus Bulletin's latest tests

Virus Bulletin (VB) conducted its latest test in August, posting the results this month. The security research company evaluated 26 anti-malware products (product submission deadline was August 22) for the 32-bit version of Windows Server 2008 SP2. The basic requirements for a product passing the test is detecting, both on demand and on access, in its default settings, all malware known to be "In the Wild" at the time of the review, and not detecting any false positives when scanning a set of clean files. The products were pitted against about 3,000 unique samples of malware that fall into four categories: WildList viruses, worms and bots, polymorphic viruses, and Trojans.

AntiVir, 10 others, fail Virus Bulletin's latest tests - Ars Technica

"Avira couldn't detect only one of several thousand infected files, therefore the detection rate was not 100, but 99,99997 percent," an Avira spokesperson told Ars. "The rule for a VB100 is to have 100 percent, so Avira didn't get the VB100 award this time. The problem was already fixed by the time the VB magazine was published. All Avira products are able to detect 100 percent of the files since then." On the other side of the tests, we should note that Microsoft's success with its Forefront product is promising not only for business users, but for consumers as well, given that it uses the same engine as the newly released Microsoft Security Essentials.

Sounds good to me

You wouldn't believe the amount of malware infested machines that have Avast for their Antivirus protection. I've seen more than my share of them and I would not put it on one of my computers. .... I'm sorry, I know a lot of the members here use it, but it's not one of my top choices.

Jacee said:

"Avira couldn't detect only one of several thousand infected files, therefore the detection rate was not 100, but 99,99997 percent," an Avira spokesperson told Ars. "The rule for a VB100 is to have 100 percent, so Avira didn't get the VB100 award this time. The problem was already fixed by the time the VB magazine was published. All Avira products are able to detect 100 percent of the files since then." On the other side of the tests, we should note that Microsoft's success with its Forefront product is promising not only for business users, but for consumers as well, given that it uses the same engine as the newly released Microsoft Security Essentials.

Sounds good to me

You wouldn't believe the amount of malware infested machines that have Avast for their Antivirus protection. I've seen more than my share of them and I would not put it on one of my computers. .... I'm sorry, I know a lot of the members here use it, but it's not one of my top choices.

Your favorite Avira missed vb 100 award by 0.1 %.

Jacee said:

"Avira couldn't detect only one of several thousand infected files, therefore the detection rate was not 100, but 99,99997 percent," an Avira spokesperson told Ars. "The rule for a VB100 is to have 100 percent, so Avira didn't get the VB100 award this time. The problem was already fixed by the time the VB magazine was published. All Avira products are able to detect 100 percent of the files since then." On the other side of the tests, we should note that Microsoft's success with its Forefront product is promising not only for business users, but for consumers as well, given that it uses the same engine as the newly released Microsoft Security Essentials.

Sounds good to me

You wouldn't believe the amount of malware infested machines that have Avast for their Antivirus protection. I've seen more than my share of them and I would not put it on one of my computers. .... I'm sorry, I know a lot of the members here use it, but it's not one of my top choices.

You quoted info for Avira there, not Avast. Avast was actually one of the ones that passed.

Airbot said:

Jacee said:

"Avira couldn't detect only one of several thousand infected files, therefore the detection rate was not 100, but 99,99997 percent," an Avira spokesperson told Ars. "The rule for a VB100 is to have 100 percent, so Avira didn't get the VB100 award this time. The problem was already fixed by the time the VB magazine was published. All Avira products are able to detect 100 percent of the files since then." On the other side of the tests, we should note that Microsoft's success with its Forefront product is promising not only for business users, but for consumers as well, given that it uses the same engine as the newly released Microsoft Security Essentials.

Sounds good to me

You wouldn't believe the amount of malware infested machines that have Avast for their Antivirus protection. I've seen more than my share of them and I would not put it on one of my computers. .... I'm sorry, I know a lot of the members here use it, but it's not one of my top choices.

You quoted info for Avira there, not Avast. Avast was actually one of the ones that passed.

Yes, Avast was one that passed these tests, but unfortunately it doesn't pass in the real world concerning the the malware infected machines I work on.

Jacee said:

Airbot said:

Jacee said:

Sounds good to me

You wouldn't believe the amount of malware infested machines that have Avast for their Antivirus protection. I've seen more than my share of them and I would not put it on one of my computers. .... I'm sorry, I know a lot of the members here use it, but it's not one of my top choices.

You quoted info for Avira there, not Avast. Avast was actually one of the ones that passed.

Yes, Avast was one that passed these tests, but unfortunately it doesn't pass in the real world concerning the the malware infected machines I work on.

Yes, avast does a horrible job in real-world protection. It even let's in rogue antiviruses and antispyware without a warning. Avira is okay, eset is my favorite. I once did eset v.s 50 zero-day malware. Eset almost got all but a few dident and were running on the system but after a reboot every virus was gone for some reason =).
Typed on iPhone