-
June 26th, 2008, 04:27 PM
#1
Rising AV FRee
Minacross
"Blessed be Egypt my people"(Is:19:25)
-
June 26th, 2008, 05:25 PM
#2
There's a good discussion going on here about it: http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=213187
Hope that helps (I'd not heard about it before now).
TEk
-
June 26th, 2008, 05:28 PM
#3
I don't know how good it is but it is from China which seems to be the source of most malware these days. Personally, I wouldn't touch any security program from China.
-
June 26th, 2008, 05:38 PM
#4
I was thinking the very same thing Jerry!
TEk
-
June 26th, 2008, 09:19 PM
#5
Also, it's major download site is Brothersoft, which has pretty bad reputation.
-
June 27th, 2008, 02:06 AM
#6
the following page shows it's doing a good job even better than DR.Web
http://www.virusbtn.com/Session-b268...008/03_13a.xml
Last edited by minacross; June 27th, 2008 at 02:11 AM.
Minacross
"Blessed be Egypt my people"(Is:19:25)
-
June 27th, 2008, 02:37 AM
#7
the following page shows it's doing a good job
? The rating is average at best.
Even if it had a good rating I would wait to try it. Let someone else discover if the test is meaningful. You don't want to be the first on your block to try any security program.
Its Chinese. They don't have the best reputation for quality control in any product. Worse, given the attacks on international Web infrastructure from China, are you willing to trust them with security? It could do a good job of detecting malware except for the one embedded within itself.
I'm curious why you care about this product? There are plenty of free A/Vs with proven track records.
-
June 27th, 2008, 08:39 PM
#8
When I see any rating, where Norton, and McAfee score ++, and +, I don't trust it.
-
June 27th, 2008, 09:58 PM
#9
Who rigged that series of tests?
Just my thought on that listing.
-
June 28th, 2008, 07:02 AM
#10
FWIW ...
Virus Bulletin : News - AV-test.org issues latest figures
http://www.virusbtn.com/news/2008/03_13a.xml
"Detection rates for malware, adware and spyware" sorted by
"Overall Average" (descending) then "Product" name (ascending):
-
June 28th, 2008, 09:50 PM
#11
You know guys, I really don't like those ratings.
When installing, or recommending security program, I rather rely on my experience, and what other people have to say about their experience.
Again, looking at the rating posted by SDr., I can see some one of the best products: Nod32 (12), F-Secure (16), and Kaspersky (19), scoring lower, then Norton, and McAfee.
To me it's just ridicuolous.
-
June 28th, 2008, 10:59 PM
#12
One of the two techniques used by anti-virus programs is maintenance of a "signature" file containing bits of code that identify virus programs. As new viruses are found, their signatures are added to the file. Obviously, such a file will increase to insupportable size unless old signatures are removed.
When a virus has not been found "in the wild" for some period of time its signature is removed. The period of time will vary by A/V vendor. Some percentage of the viruses tested by the rating organizations are not in circulation which leads to the following possibilities:
1) A low rating may have absolutely no relation to the a/v's ability to detect new or recent viruses.
2) A low rating may indicate a more efficient a/v because it isn't wasting time comparing to signatures that haven't been active in years.
Broni is absolutely right. Such comparisons are at best meaningless, at worst misleading.
-
June 29th, 2008, 05:09 AM
#13
Raimund Genes, Trend Micro's anti-malware CTO, told El Reg that Trend Micro intends to pull its products from participation in Virus Bulletin tests. He also described VB100 as a "20th Century test" that fails to access the "real-life" performance of security software. "Testing is not done with an internet connection and it isn't testing for things like rootkits. Pattern matching is now only one piece of puzzle, alongside behaviour blocking technology but pattern matching is all [that] VB100 tests," Genes explained. "VB100 has great marketing value but its testing methodology is flawed."
Trend withdraws from 'irrelevant' VB100 anti-virus test
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200...est_criticism/
...
Andreas Marx, chief exec of AV-Test.org, said that although there is nothing wrong with the actual testing performed by Virus Bulletin, the WildList sample set it tests against is hopelessly out of date.
"The threat landscape has changed dramatically, just a few years back, we had to deal with 10 to 20 virus samples per day, now we are up to 21,000 unique new samples per day, but the current April WildList only includes 678 samples - that's the number of samples we are getting on an average day in under an hour," Marx told El Reg.
"Besides this, the WildList only covers self-replicating malware such as viruses, but not today's most common threats, like Trojan Horses or rootkits. By ignoring today's reality, the list misses the really HOT samples and the numbers of samples on the WildList is too small," he added.
A changing threat landscape in the anti-malware world spurred the creation of non-profit Anti-Malware Testing Standards Organization (AMTSO). The organisation, which hopes to agree new standards for anti-malware testing. Both Trend Micro and Virus Bulletin are members of the organisation, which plans to hold its next meeting in Microsoft's Redmond campus next month. ®
-
June 29th, 2008, 11:09 AM
#14
I just Googled it, and it doesn't pass my acid test. I look for unbiased positive comments from sources I trust (Majorgeeks, C|Net, etc.) in the first 25 hits. Nada. The only positive remarks are from Rising or companies associated with it. Plenty of sceptics, though.
If it's the most-used A/V in China, that would give me pause for sure.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|