Guest

antivirus tesing

Recommended Posts

Guest

@Fabian Wosar @GT500

i know that we should not believe in av testing but if emsisoft uses same database as bitdefender with additional of its own then why bitdefender is detecting more malware as compared to emsisoft .

https://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php

as per latest test by av comparatives.

bitdefender detected 99.5 % and emsisoft 98.5% in month of feb 2018

bitdefender detected  99.9% and emsisoft 98.8% in month of  july-nov 2017

bitdefender detected 100% and emsisoft 99.2 % in month of nov.

so i want to ask whether bitdefender is actually providing its exact and complete database to emsisoft or not or something is missing somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2018 at 3:04 PM, pupbuster said:

i know that we should not believe in av testing but if emsisoft uses same database as bitdefender with additional of its own then why bitdefender is detecting more malware as compared to emsisoft .

It's not their Anti-Virus engine that's detecting the things EAM is missing. They have a behavioral monitoring component as well, and it's responsible for the difference in test results.

 

On 4/1/2018 at 3:04 PM, pupbuster said:

so i want to ask whether bitdefender is actually providing its exact and complete database to emsisoft or not or something is missing somewhere.

If that were the case, then BitDefender would be losing customers. There's more than half a dozen companies that license the rights to use BitDefender's scan engine, database, and other technologies in their products. You can see quite a few of them in VirusTotal scan results, since any product that uses BitDefender's database will use the same detection names that BitDefender does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

@GT500 i have a question

in starting days when we used to have malwares developing there were only 3 major and popular av's norton, mcafee and kaspersky.

norton was top in terms of detection, next being kaspersky and then being mcafee. slowly mcafee started losing it's name and effectiveness, and norton was like a bloatware taking up huge system resources but kaspersky maintained it's position.

If we look today, norton has comeback to it's detection capability and improved on detection capability, while kaspersky has always maintained it's position. past3-4 years we have seen bitdefender coming into brawl between kaspersky and norton and outlasting their existence in terms of detection of malware, but still as it is said that no av can provide 100% detection. So I want to ask you on your personal information and experience, neglecting norton, what about the detection capability between kaspersky and bitdefender.

 

because till bitdefender was not popular , many other av vendors were using kaspersky engine and now most use bitdefender. so if i go by operating system (including legacy os), i have figured out below things......

1) Windows (bitdefender=kaspersky, or slightly bitdefender at higher rate)

2)symbian (kaspersky>bitdefender)

3)linux (kaspersky>bitdefender)

4)android (bitdefender>kaspersky)

 

what are your points on detection between kaspersky and bitdefender excluding what av test and av comparitives say, since both testing companies rank both of the av's as 100% in terms of detecting malware

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who has the "best" detection rate will more than likely vary from time to time, however what's more important is the technology behind whatever mechanisms the softwares are using to catch undetected malware (things like our Behavior Blocker). Keep in mind that we only license the scanning engine and database from BitDefender, and any scanning engine (no matter how good) needs to be supplemented by other protection mechanisms to provide sufficient protection.

As for any specific data on the performance or effectiveness of BitDefender's and Kaspersky's products, I haven't done any testing on my own to validate data published by testing organizations, so I can't give you any information you don't already have access to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet 'Behavior Blocker' is nowadays probably responsible for most of the detected files. For how long does antivirus software still needs to rely on file detection by signature? Is there a foreseable future, where behavioral blocker can manage (and detect) all of the malicious files out there?

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.