Calendar of Updates

[YoKenny1]

Any comment on this assessment

Not So Old Threat Scan Results

Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware by Malwarebytes - FAILED

http://www.dozleng.com/updates/index.php?showtopic=18078

[laserjet]

it is strange to me that they post no real chart of the test yet disclaimer is there. weird.

[nosirrah]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=p...G=Google+Search

Google for yourself .

I cant find a HJT log with regsort v1.1.5 from this year .

We were not for sale then .

Also if a study does not have at least a few infections from each family then it does no mean anything anyway .

I have said this a few other times but will say it again .

If there is no way to catch malware in the real world any more than I will not be adding it .

There are vendors that spend a lot of time padding their numbers with pointless definitions (long dead infections) , we think this is dishonest .

I see that they have linked here so let me put fourth a real challenge .

Gather up some malware that has existed for less than 5 days and test that . Not just one or two either , get like 20 unique infections from the last 5 days .

There would be real truth in that .

[YoKenny1]

Gather up some malware that has existed for less than 5 days and test that . Not just one or two either , get like 20 unique infections from the last 5 days .

I was only curious as to why that was a featured Event for 21st April

http://www.dozleng.com/updates/index.php?act=calendar

If you feel this is not worth discussing then please hide or delete this topic.

[joe53]

Actually the author of those tests states that they were only to demonstrate the importance of having more than one anti-malware scanner- nothing more. And I think that was well demonstrated. It was not meant as a comprehensive comparative of the scanners' detection capabilities (nor could it be, with only 3 threats tested), nor as a basis on which products to use (all were specifically recommended by the author).

What I find most interesting is that a larger test using 20 rogues is planned by the author. Unlike for the AV industry, where independent testing against large databases exists (av-comparatives, AV-Test, etc) I can find virtually no independent/objective comparative tests of anti-malware scanners' ability to detect/remove threats. I see plenty of opinions on these scanners' relative merits (and I particularly respect the opinions of the HJT experts, based on their experience at working logs with these apps) but in the final analysis I think it's time that these scanners were subjected to the same rigorous testing that the AV programs get.

For that reason alone, I applaud the dozleng testing. It ain't much yet, but it's a start in the right direction from a reputable source. With so many anti-malware vendors now offering paid products, I think it's time the industry was subject to some impartial scrutiny.