akemiiwaya — 2014-03-26T13:20:09-04:00 — #1
Originally published at: http://www.howtogeek.com/185574/latest-avtest.org-anti-virus-test-results-for-january-february-2014-released/
If you like keeping up with how well the extensive field of software security products are doing, then AVTest.org’s test results are always a good source to consult, especially if you are shopping around for a new anti-virus product to use. With this in mind, you can see how well all the security products have done during the latest round of tests conducted by AVTest.org.
straspey — 2014-03-26T14:00:23-04:00 — #2
So the question then becomes...
If Microsoft Security Essentials continues to appear at the very bottom of the list - returning the lowest detection success rates and poorest scores...why do may people continue to recommend it as a viable element of a complete PC security package ?
I use MSE, along with the Pro versions of Super Anti-Spyware, Marlwarebytes Anti-Malware, and WinPatrol.
So far so good...BUT - I would really like some reliable feedback on MSE.
cyber — 2014-03-26T16:07:07-04:00 — #3
I'm puzzled reading the results
readandshare — 2014-03-26T17:30:22-04:00 — #4
I use Win 7 with stock Microsoft firewall and Security Essentials. I bank online, buy online, and I visit all kinds of websites -- including naughty ones. But I also practice 'common sense' precautions -- such as not clicking all kinds of email links or downloading stuff from obscure sites...
Over the course of YEARS now, I simply can't recall MSE catching / quarantining a single virus!!! But then, I also regularly do manual rootkit and malware scans using Kaspersky and Malwarebytes -- and they have NEVER detected anything either!!
Malware do exist and one does need to exercise caution.
Anti-malware makers and the media have really been hyping malware to death!
Modern browsers (through which most of us make contact with the world) have improved tremendously in filtering, warning, and sandboxing.
The likes of AVTest.org is mostly academic -- and reflects poorly on reality.
Nowadays, one lousy software or hardware hiccup and all forums and media scream 'bloody hell'. So, if MSE is anywhere as bad and the world anywhere as dangerous -- the decibels of hell raising against Microsoft would be tremendously, tremendously louder!
I will continue with my current arrangement and sleep very well at night, thank you.
wilsontp — 2014-03-26T22:39:54-04:00 — #5
So am I. Symantec and Mcafee both had the same stats for the first data item, but Symantec gets a lower score... weird.
akemiiwaya — 2014-03-27T11:26:39-04:00 — #6
@cyber & @wilsontp - Look through the list until you find the one you want to see more details about. Once you find it, click on it and it will open up to show more details like this:
akemiiwaya — 2014-03-27T11:32:56-04:00 — #7
@ReadandShare - Every computer that I have been asked to work on that had problems had MSE on it. In my experience, it has let far too much through etc. for the "general everyday people" I am asked to help.
So after a point I made sure to automatically exterminate MSE from every computer I touch now and put Avast on them. It has gotten a lot better for all involved since I started doing that...their computers stay in "good condition" and I have a LOT less requests for help. ~_^
cyber — 2014-03-27T11:39:35-04:00 — #8
Thanks. I already had done this but the classification doesn't make sense to me
wilsontp — 2014-03-27T11:43:57-04:00 — #9
You're misunderstanding my complaint. I don't need help navigating the list... what bothered me was that Symantec and Mcafee showed identical numbers in the raw statistics, but had different Protection scores. Both had similar raw numbers but different protection scores.
So my problem isn't getting around in the list. It's the opacity of the way the scores are calculated.
Here's Symantec's score:
Here's McAfee's score
Someone explain to me why one gets a 5.5 and the other gets a 6.0. This makes it look like Symantec is inferior, when at worst, both are equal, and at best Symantec is slightly better at present.
akemiiwaya — 2014-03-27T12:21:08-04:00 — #10
@wilsontp - The best "guess" that I can make on that one is that perhaps the difference in scoring was based on the results of each AV product versus "end of 2013" threats while testing during January (considering their last Win 7 test was July - August, so a larger time window versus a shift from January to February).
And I agree, that does look "odd" being like that...
Correction on the "time frame" now edited into the post.
wilsontp — 2014-03-27T13:17:16-04:00 — #11
Yeah, I didn't look at last year's results to see if Symantec has been getting lower scores. If their scoring follows a trend, rather than the latest data set, that would totally make sense. I just wish they published their testing and scoring methodology.
akemiiwaya — 2014-03-27T13:38:43-04:00 — #12
@wilsontp - I stand corrected on when the last test on Windows 7 was done...it was July - August of last year. Sorry about the incorrect time frame reference earlier.
system — 2014-04-05T13:20:11-04:00 — #13
This topic was automatically closed after 10 days. New replies are no longer allowed.