New VIRUS.GR virus report! Best on the net!


Recommended Posts

http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=69&mnu=69

2-16 April 2005 (NEW!!!)

-The test was made on 02-16 April 2005, using Windows XP Professional SP1 on a P4 2600 Mhz, 512MB DDRAM.

-All programs tested had the latest versions, upgrades and updates and they were tested using their full scanning capabilities e.g. heuristics, full scan etc.

-The 91202 virus samples were chosen using VS2000 according to Kaspersky, F-Prot, RAV, Nod32, Dr.Web, Sweep, BitDefender and McAfee antivirus programs. Each virus sample was unique by virus name, meaning that AT LEAST 1 antivirus program detected it as a new virus.

-ALL virus samples were unpacked and the only samples that were kept were the ones that were packed using external-dos-packers (that means not winzip, winrar, winace etc).

-The virus samples had the correct file extension using a special program (Renexts) and were unique, according to checksum32 filesize.

-Most "fake" virus samples were removed, as well as "garbage" files.

-The program PER was not tested because there was no english demo version available.

-The programs Extendia AVK , BOClean , VET , Titan , RisingAV and Freedom were not tested because there was no demo version available.

-The program InVircible did not include a "typical" scanner-function and could not be tested.

-The program V-Catch checks only mail accounts and could not be tested.

-The following file types were used.

BAT, ΒΙΝ, CLA, CLASS, CLS, COM, CSC, DAT, DOC, ELF, EML, EXE, HLP, HQX, HTA, HTM, IMG, INF, INI, JS, MAC, MDB, MSG, OLE, PHP, PIF, PL, PPT, PRC, REG, SCR, SH, SHS, SMM, STI, TD0, TPU, VBA, VBS, WBT, XLS, XMI, XML.

The virus samples were divided into these categories, according to the type of the virus :

File = BeOS, FreeBSD, Linux, Palm, OS2, Unix, BinaryImage, BAS viruses, MenuetOS viruses.

MS-DOS = MS-DOS and HLL*. viruses.

Windows = Win.*.* viruses.

Macro = Macro and Formula viruses.

Malware = Adware, DoS, Constructors, Exploit, Flooders, Hoax, Jokes, Nukers, Sniffers, Spoofers, Virus Construction Tools, Virus Tools, Corrupted, Droppers, Intended, PolyEngines.

Script = BAT, Corel, HTML, Java, Scripts, VBS, WBS, Worms, PHP, Perl viruses.

Trojans-Backdoors = Trojan and Backdoor viruses.

Rank

1. Kaspersky Personal Pro version 5.0.20 - 99.28%

2. AVK version 15.0.5 - 97.93%

3. F-Secure 2005 version 5.10.450 - 97.55%

4. eScan Virus Control version 2.6.518.8 - 96.75%

5. Norton Corporate version 9.0.3.1000 - 91.64%

6. Norton Professional version 2005 - 91.57%

7. McAfee version 9.0.10 - 89.75%

8. Virus Chaser version 5.0 - 88.31%

9. BitDefender version 8.0.137 - 88.13%

10. CyberScrub version 1.0 - 87.87%

11. Panda Platinum 2005 version 9.01.02 - 87.75%

12. Arcavir - 87.73%

13. MKS_VIR 2005 - 87.70%

14. RAV version 8.6.105 - 87.26%

15. F-Prot version 3.16b - 87.07%

16. Panda Titanium version 4.01.02 - 86.27%

17. PC-Cillin 2005 version 12.1.1034 - 85.98%

18. Nod32 version 2.12.4 - 85.66%

19. Command version 4.92.7 - 84.92%

20. AntiVir version 6.30.00.17 - 84.50%

21. Avast version 4.6.623 - 76.65%

22. Dr. Web version 4.32b - 78.71%

23. Sophos Sweep version 3.91 - 73.79%

24. UNA version 1.83 - 73.49%

25. BullGuard version 4.5 - 70.24%

26. Norman version 5.80.05 - 65.32%

27. Ikarus version 5.16 - 60.97%

28. AVG version 7.0.308 - 54.07%

29. E-Trust version 7.0.5.3 - 52.35%

30. ZoneAlarm with VET Antivirus version 5.5.062.011 - 52.32%

31. Vexira 2005 version 5.0.56 - 51.74%

32. VirusBuster 2005 version 5.0.147 - 51.51%

33. Solo 3.0 version 2.7.1 - 49.16%

34. Fire version 2.7 - 48.86%

35. ClamWin version 0.83 - 48.44%

36. Digital Patrol version 5.00.08 - 48.10%

37. V-Buster Pro - 46.33%

38. Protector Plus version 7.2.G01 - 45.81%

39. V3Pro 2004 - 38.87%

40. Ewido version 3.0 - 38.67%

41. ViRobot Expert version 4.0 - 38.10%

42. Quick Heal version 7.03 - 37.75%

43. VirScan Plus version 14.703 - 36.20%

44. MR2S version 2.0.104 - 35.05%

45. RHBVS version 4.60.821 - 32.96%

46. A Squared 2 version 1.6 - 25.37%

47. VirIT version 5.2.10 - 22.83%

48. TDS version 3.2.0 - 21.09%

49. Wave version 2.0 - 16.49%

50. AntiTrojan Shield version 1.4.0.15 - 11.91%

51. PC Door Guard version 3.0.0.15- 11.91%

52. Trojan Hunter version 4.2.908 - 10.19%

53. Tauscan version 1.70.1414 - 6.99%

54. Trojan Remover version 6.3.6 - 6.67%

55. The Cleaner version 4.1.42.52 - 6.28%

56. IP Armor version 5.46.0703 - 2.77%

57. Hacker Eliminator version 1.2 - 2.67%

58. Anti-Hacker & Trojan Expert 2003 version 1.6 - 0%

DETAIL TEST RESULTS (.rar compressed file)

I just personally decided to try NOD32 this past week since so many people say they like it. It's nice, but it does *not* have the best detection rate ever. I tested it against a collection of virii and it missed many small-time viruses that competitors found.

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=77033

I wouldn't take much notice of these tests.

How comes at least two of the products that utilise the same engine are so wildly different in detection rate?

I have no doubt KAV is very likely to be one of the best AV products, but that is probably the only truth I can see in those tests. I'm not even going to ask why anti-trojan products are considered anti viral. :p

I just personally decided to try NOD32 this past week since so many people say they like it.  It's nice, but it does *not* have the best detection rate ever.  I tested it against a collection of virii and it missed many small-time viruses that competitors found.

585822593[/snapback]

Were they actual viruses, or test viruses? NOD32 does not detect fake viruses and WILL NOT detect them at all (this is by design) - that is why some reviews give it a bad score.

I would imagine the score for NOD32 is not great because of fake viruses (it only say "most" were removed) and/or not detecting adware.

Were they actual viruses, or test viruses? NOD32 does not detect fake viruses and WILL NOT detect them at all (this is by design) - that is why some reviews give it a bad score.

I would imagine the score for NOD32 is not great because of fake viruses (it only say "most" were removed) and/or not detecting adware.

585822659[/snapback]

They were actual viruses I collected "in the wild" so to speak. The heuristics engine detected a great number of them which is a plus, but when you put the complete misses together with the number of heuristics hits, it seemed clear that the actual detection database itself was rather lacking.

I think the reason that the detection database is less as if an AV supplier were to add every virus to its database, the intensity of the resource demands of the product would be extremelly high. It is usually up to those behind the product to choose the severity of the threats. With NOD32, I see the heuristics as the first line defence with rules aiding as a backup.

One interesting thing brought up in the Wilder's thread was if all of the AVs were licensed or trialed. I know with NOD, a lot of the default settings are insufficient. I am not even sure heuristics are enabled off-the-shelf. A lot of other products do have limited availability in trial/shareware items, for example: ewido paid can scan inside of archives while the free solution cannot.

I am not greatly surprised with the results, a lot of the test samples were malware/trojans, while IMO, it does usually take seperate products to provide greater protection in specialised areas (AVs for virus, ATs for trojans, etc). I would however, be interested in seeing the test categorised more so with anti-trojans being used solely on virus, solely on malware or a similar structured approach.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Apple reportedly looks to blacklisted Chinese memory chips as RAM prices climb by Karthik Mudaliar Image via Apple Apple is reportedly trying to get a clearance from the Trump administration to buy memory from ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) to get some relief from soaring DRAM prices. As per a report by the Financial Times, Apple approached the Commerce Department more than a month ago and also spoke to other officials and allies in Washington. For starters, CXMT is a company that's already been placed on the Pentagon's list of Chinese military companies. The Chinese company is the country's top DRAM maker. For Apple, the timing is certainly awkward but not surprising. Tim Cook had recently warned that Apple would have to raise prices because AI companies are buying up large amounts of memory for data centers, and just like that, Apple raised MacBook and iPad prices. Micron also recently revealed that customers have committed billions of dollars to secure memory supply years in advance, which shows us how aggressive securing infrastructure has become. This gives suppliers such as Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron more leverage, while pushing hardware makers to look for alternatives. CXMT is one of those alternatives, but not the simplest one. Apple has spent many years trying to diversify parts of its supply chain away from China, especially for final assembly, while still depending heavily on Chinese manufacturing and suppliers. Even domestic brands from China are moving towards CXMT and YMTC instead of relying on Samsung, Micron, and SK Hynix. For Apple, though, it would invite more scrutiny than local Chinese companies. For now, this is more like a lobbying effort rather than a confirmed supply deal. There's no official statement from either of the parties. What is clearer, though, is the pressure behind such a request. AI demand has certainly made hardware a bottleneck, and companies are trying everything they can to bring things back to normal, even if that means making politically sensitive choices. Source: Financial Times
    • I did test it a month or so back, but ... the results I expect to be on the first page are not there.
    • Neowin is saying these are good prices? Thats crazy. As others have said they are just ######. Time for big tech to bring down the prices for real not this fake crap.
    • The iFlyTek AINote 2 is among the thinnest E-Ink tablets. It has an EMR stylus, a built-in fingerprint reader, and plenty of built-in AI features. You had me until "and plenty of built-in AI features." That and any company that still does the iProduct naming trope is an immediate pass. It suggests the company isn't very imaginative or creative and is trying to piggyback off another company's success. Extremely lame. Also kind of expensive. Better choices at lower prices out there.
    • These are not "great" prices... just "less awful". Apparently "Those who forget the past are doomed to pay higher prices and think they've won."
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      486
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      220
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!