Are virusscanners really this bad? shocking results

Discussion in 'Security and Anti-Virus Software' started by Phil, Sep 18, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,039
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    I did not mention this before but Spyware Terminator did ok. Of all the specific spyware tools it did best.

    The good: It alerted about all kinds of changes to the system and ports being opened up. It kept running, and the virus did not disable it.

    The bad: it was not able to stop the trojans and virusses.

    In this little test Spyware Terminator did a lot better than Spyware Doctor, Adaware and Spybot S&D, who were virtually unaware of anything happening.

    http://www.spywareterminator.com/ It's also free.
     
  2. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Mime with Tourette's

    Reputations:
    1,163
    Messages:
    3,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Really? "Looking for a muscle-bound cyborg of a security product that'll tell your spyware problem "Hasta la vista, baby?" Keep looking."
     
  3. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,039
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    It's just an antispyware app, nothing more. If they expected more they are going to be dissappointed.

    And all it did was notice things. It did not clean, protect or prevent. So I agree with that review.

    Anyway, it did a lot better than Spyware Doctor, Adaware and Spybot S&D.

    Frankly I don't trust any of these programs to protect me. For real protection I recommend Kaspersky.
     
  4. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Mime with Tourette's

    Reputations:
    1,163
    Messages:
    3,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    The PC Magazine review does not agree, and frankly, neither do I.
     
  5. j0rdy

    j0rdy Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    4
    Messages:
    206
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    You DO know that PC Magazine/ZDNet/Cnet are all bought and paid for 'reviews', right?

    I use to read PC Magazine (along time ago when it was a 'magazine only') and read it religiously mind you - but over the years, I started to notice a trend with the scores the kept giving Symantec/Norton Anti-Virus which was not adding up when being forced to see (first hand) all the infected machines, etc. that had the latest home & corporate versions of SAV, etc.

    All in all - one and one, well... equalled two - though I didn't really want to admit/see it :eek:


    - Jordan
     
  6. j0rdy

    j0rdy Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    4
    Messages:
    206
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30

    Gosh Phil! I thought I died and went to heaven with seeing how you preach Kaspersky like the gospel :p

    LoL

    Your new-found fondness for Kaspersky is just a little hard to miss these days is all - not that it's a bad thing :p


    - Jordan
     
  7. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Mime with Tourette's

    Reputations:
    1,163
    Messages:
    3,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Yes, of course. However, the trend and evidence points more towards inflating positive reviews than assassination via negative reviews. I read them, along with other less-than-informed reviewers such as Consumer Reports, and formulate my own opinions.

    Of the purchased products, I would go with Kaspersky, NOD32, or ZoneAlarm Security Suite. However, based on what is free, there is little need to pay.
     
  8. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,039
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    You may have misunderstood what I meant.

    I mean: in this test, running the malicious file virus!!!!.exe in administrator mode, the only spyware program that noticed anything going on was Spyware Terminator.

    Adaware, Spybot S&D, Spyware Doctor did not notice anything at all. Nothing that is.

    So in this little test Spyware Terminator is clearly the winner. I am only talking about the real time protection here.

    PC Magazine has never tested this specific file so they don't disagree with that. They have done a completly different test.

    I never believed there was a need to pay for antivirus programs. That was untill a couple of days ago when I witnessed how easily they were disabled by this trojan. Now I do believe it makes sense to pay for Kaspersky.
     
  9. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Mime with Tourette's

    Reputations:
    1,163
    Messages:
    3,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    I am agreeing with PC Magazine's overall opinion of Spyware Terminator; specifically, that is generally ineffective and that there are better choices.

    And I believe that I am disagreeing with your overall testing methodology, basing conclusions on the results of a single infectious point and introducing that single infectious point into systems without a systematic and hierarchical defense mechanism implemented.

    It would seem that a single infectious point could be created or concocted to be invasive to a majority of systems. An engineered virus it is after all. Systemic testing on multiple fronts is far more valid for interpretation and for inference of results.

    Further, it is unreasonable, or perhaps simply foolish, to presume that a system would only be protected by a single barrier. I run a hardware firewall, a software firewall (that block both incoming and outgoing), Anti-Spyware software, and anti-Virus software. Further, I scan for Spyware with multiple software scanners and scan my file system and registry with multiple software scanners as well.

    While this might be a tad more than the average user does, it is not actually more than most security suites attempt to do.

    Not intended as a flame, nor as a personal criticism. However, it is intended as a serious questioning of your methodology.
     
  10. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,039
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    I think you're reading in stuff that was not there.

    I never based conclusions. I never claimed to have ran a systematical, good, objective test.

    All I said was "In this little test Spyware Terminator did a lot better than Spyware Doctor, Adaware and Spybot S&D, who were virtually unaware of anything happening."

    You see in the words 'in this little test' I am already acknowleding the limited value.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads - virusscanners really shocking
  1. vahdyx
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    520
  2. Peon
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    710
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page