Andrew M

DehHaxor4evr review of Emsisoft antimalware 11

Recommended Posts

Emsisoft products have always been known as having dual scan engines. While these tests did not point out which engine was involved in every detection, the ones that were visible were caught by the Bitdefender engine. I've been using Emsisoft products since 2011 and one thing I have noticed is that the "A" or the modified A-Squared engine has become less of a factor over the years. The Bitdefender engine has improved over the years and has made the A2 engine inconsequential. Perhaps the A2 engine should be eliminated or replaced?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emsisoft products have always been known as having dual scan engines. While these tests did not point out which engine was involved in every detection, the ones that were visible were caught by the Bitdefender engine. I've been using Emsisoft products since 2011 and one thing I have noticed is that the "A" or the modified A-Squared engine has become less of a factor over the years. The Bitdefender engine has improved over the years and has made the A2 engine inconsequential. Perhaps the A2 engine should be eliminated or replaced?

I say it depends on what kind of infections are present on the machine - if you are going to work with a lot of PUPs then you will see a lot more detections from the Emsisoft engine.

(I think they have a blogpost showing the amount of detections for each engine - with the Emsisoft engine responsible for ~70% of detections)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say it depends on what kind of infections are present on the machine - if you are going to work with a lot of PUPs then you will see a lot more detections from the Emsisoft engine.

(I think they have a blogpost showing the amount of detections for each engine - with the Emsisoft engine responsible for ~70% of detections)

I believe much of these PUP's are behavior detections. I don't know if the modified A2 engine and the behavior detection require each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Behavior Blocker does not require signatures, but the Emsisoft engine makes a big difference when you have to work with infected computers on a daily basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe much of these PUP's are behavior detections. I don't know if the modified A2 engine and the behavior detection require each other.

They aren't. Those are all detections of the A2 engine. At the moment A2 accounts for about 60% of all detections reported back to us while accounting for only about 5% of all the false positives reported to us. If it was redundant, we would have removed it a long time ago. Would save us resources because we wouldn't have to create any signatures anymore. But it isn't. Far from it.

The statistic Sintharius mentioned can be found here:

http://blog.emsisoft.com/2015/03/25/antivirus-anti-malware-anti-pup-what-is-emsisoft-really/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.