Microsoft's OneCare takes last place in anti-virus evaluation


Recommended Posts

The top dog in the tests was G Data Security's AntiVirusKit

March 01, 2007 -- Microsoft's Windows Live OneCare came in dead last out of a group of 17 anti-virus programs tested against hundreds of thousands of worms, viruses, Trojan horses and other malware, an Austrian anti-virus researcher reported yesterday.

The AV Comparatives Web site, which is maintained by Andreas Cleminti from Innsbruck, Austria, posts quarterly results of tests that pit the top anti-virus products against a dynamic list of nearly half a million individual pieces of malware.

Top dog, according to Cleminti's tests, was G Data Security's AntiVirusKit (AVK), which nailed 99.5% of the malicious code. Not far behind were AEC's TrustPort AV WS, at 99.4%, Avira's AntiVir PE Premium, at 98.9%, MicroWorld's eScan Anti-Virus, at 97.9%, F-Secure's Anti-Virus, at 97.9%, and Kaspersky Labs' AV, which stopped 97.9% of the malware.

Better known products such as Symantec's Norton Anti-Virus and McAfee's VirusScan posted results of 96.8% and 91.6%, respectively.

Holding the bottom spot was Microsoft's Windows Live OneCare, the consumer security suite that the Redmond, Wash. developer launched last year. OneCare took care of just 82.4% of the malware.

Cleminti also tested the 17 products against polymorphic viruses, those which produce sometimes vast numbers of variants as they try to sneak by scanners. "The results of the polymorphic test are of importance because they how flexible an anti-virus scan engine is and how good the detection quality of complex viruses is," said Cleminti in his write-up.

Only Symantec's Norton AntiVirus and ESET's NOD32 Anti-Virus caught every variant of the 12 polymorphic families, he said. In that test, OneCare placed 15th, detecting every version of only two families, and missing seven of the polymorphic families completely.

Cleminti's report is available online (download PDF).

This is not the first evaluation to give a Microsoft security program a black eye. Last week, for example, Australian security company PC Tools released research that claimed Windows Defender -- Microsoft's anti-spyware title -- detected just 46% to 53% of spyware.

"We are looking closely at the methodology and results of the test to ensure that Windows Live OneCare performs better in future tests," a Microsoft spokesperson said.

Source: Computerworld

Not to be too off topic, but the antivirus programs that took top honours... I've never heard about them before and now I'm intrigued ;)

OneCare... well that's not surprising based on what has already been said about the program, I'm just curious how this would be allowed to happen. I would assume they'd have plenty to test their product against

Took me long to find it. (Well, 1 minute is long to find the real site of the "best" antivirus IMO)

http://www.gdata.de/trade/productview/727/16/

Btw, for people saying that it's good for MS's first entry, let me says that MS actually brought a company of Antivirus and a company of anti-spyware for making One Care in 2005...

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/72600/microsof...-consumers.html

Edited by Nienor
Took me long to find it. (Well, 1 minute is long to find the real site of the "best" antivirus IMO)

http://www.gdata.de/trade/productview/727/16/

Btw, for people saying that it's good for MS's first entry, let me says that MS actually brought a company of Antivirus and a company of anti-spyware for making One Care in 2005...

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/72600/microsof...-consumers.html

Well yes they bought the company to make the software. But its them who are doing the virus finding and updates yeh?

The previous team that was working on the previous software from the previous company with some new MS people to put this together :p

I simply mean that is not a "new" start...

to many charts

best antivirus is?

Check the summary PDF? The answer depends on your needs. Not only detection accuracy plays a role, but feature sets too.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/erge...summary2006.pdf

I personally use and recommend NOD32 for great detection rates, fast speed, configurability, and frequent updates. That AV also takes the prize as Overall Winner in this test. Kaspersky is often brought forward as having near top scores in accuracy, but it lacks e.g. heuristic scans like NOD32 that can occasionally be useful in very sudden virus outbreaks. I'd avoid anything Symantec/Norton as many agree it has low performance. We also missed good enterprise-scale monitoring features in the Corporate Edition of Symantec Antivirus here. Try AVG or Avast! if you're a home user that can't stomach paying for it. :)

Edited by Jugalator
Check the summary PDF? The answer depends on your needs. Not only detection accuracy plays a role, but feature sets too.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/erge...summary2006.pdf

The 2006 tests are totally outdated, and the test results are not valid anymore!

Look at the actual test results from February 2007 which just got released, things changed quite a bit:

http://www.av-comparatives.org/

Here are the results from the 2007 report pdf:

av-comparatives-feb07.png

As you can see, Nod32 did even worse than Symantec! :blink:

Anyone ever use this AntiVirusKit? If so, how is it?

I'm actually using it since last december (screenshot) and the system resources usage is pretty acceptable IMO (the maker claims this 2007 version is around 30% lighter from previous version). However, I had to make some tweaking on it disabling certain options (did also a custom install) in order to suit AVK 2007 to my needs.

Btw, AVK uses two antivirus engines, the current 2007 version includes the Kaspersky+Avast! engines.

Former 2006v. was Kasp+BitDefender :shiftyninja:

The BBC has just picked this up: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6418965.stm

Windows fails second virus test

The OneCare software has failed two independent tests. Microsoft's Live OneCare security software has failed tests which check how well it spots and stops malicious programs designed to attack Windows.

OneCare was the only failure among 17 anti-virus programs tested by the AV Comparatives organisation. Microsoft's software only spotted 82.4% of the 500,000 viruses that the independent group subjected it to. The test is the second in less than a month that Microsoft's anti-virus software has failed.

Batfink

Who really uses CareOne! If you really want a antivirus program, you are better off buying a third party software, then using CareOne.

Exactly. No one with at least one working brain cell left would use that OneCare crap :x

Absolutely any other AV is better - even Norton :pinch:

Exactly. No one with at least one working brain cell left would use that OneCare crap :x

Absolutely any other AV is better - even Norton :pinch:

I have several working brain cells and I use OneCare on my laptop. It works fine for me, not to mention that I'm very good about avoiding any suspicious files. Please don't assume that everyone who uses this program doesn't know any better.

I have several working brain cells and I use OneCare on my laptop. It works fine for me, not to mention that I'm very good about avoiding any suspicious files. Please don't assume that everyone who uses this program doesn't know any better.

You mean you knowingly wasted money on a crap program that placed last in the AV test, even though you knew better? :blink:

That doesn't sound very smart to me, not at all :pinch:

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Bluesky COO warns social media regulations could destroy competition from small startups by Paul Hill Fears that increasing government control of social media risks regulatory capture by the biggest social media firms were raised again recently. Bluesky’s chief operating officer said in an interview that social media bans for children and tighter regulations for social media firms risk creating a world where there are only a few social media platforms run by companies with the deepest pockets. Regulations on social media firms have been very lax since they appeared for mainstream users in the 2000’s. This gave Meta, Snapchat, and Google time to build up their user bases and get entrenched, with Meta being the most successful. Now that Meta has succeeded, it has been attempting regulatory capture. By pushing for more regulations of social media, Meta hopes to make it more difficult for rivals to challenge it. For its part, it doesn’t need to worry about the cost of regulation because it has a lot of money to spend, whereas startups do not. Speaking to CNBC, Rose Wang, Bluesky’s chief operating officer, said: “I support the protection and the safety of youth, the question that we have then is at what cost, because essentially what I’m scared of is in the long term, we’re headed to a world where there’s about three to five platforms, and extreme heavy regulation of those platforms, and basically the whole compliance teams of these platforms are 10 times the size of our entire team. So, basically, we’re living in a world where it’s almost impossible for smaller entrants to come in and build healthier spaces. These platforms have led to a place where the bottom line is the thing that drives what they do... so I understand why governments have to step in and regulate, because the platforms have done nothing right.” She said that while she is not against regulation, there needs to be more channels between the small to mid-sized players and regulators to help protect them. She says that big tech players, on the other hand, “who we know are circumventing regulation,” need to be regulated. Essentially, the Bluesky position is one of nuance, rather than absolutes. While Bluesky’s proposal may preserve competition in the social media space, it still doesn’t address the massive privacy implications these age verification measures introduce, such as handing over sensitive identity documents to access age-gated content. Source: CNBC
    • it dosnt support onprem exchange. it dosnt support mapi-calls. the views are all worse/limited. its slower. it cant see public folder calendars. we already have webmail. the list of other missing features is pretty huge but i only see it when customers call to say their email isnt working, and 9/10 times its cause they accidentality changed to outlooknew(new). Hold the line everyone!
    • yeah, this looks beautiful. Damn this winter's going to be great.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      249
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      71
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      70
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!