If AV-Test had been able to correlate the % of DEP and ASLR executable files in the various products with their own protection/ blocking/detection test results against real-world threats, I might be more impressed.
But they don't. So I'm unsure of the significance of these findings from a practical point of view. For example, Trend Micro scored only 71% in this test, yet scored 100% in AV-Test's own latest Sept-Oct Protection tests. The latest (Oct) AV- Comparatives real-world protection test also found TM blocked 100% of threats.
ZDNet's summary that "Your anti-malware system does you no good if it's successfully compromised. If your anti-virus fails (e.g., is exploited/disabled by malware), then your computer is left unprotected." is a truism that generates FUD.
The original AV-Test article is a bit more honest in their summary: "Nor is DEP (or NX-Bit) the ultimate protection of files, but authors of exploits are required to scale additional hurdles for this as well, which in turn means more effort. It's often the sum of all [layered security] things that counts." http://www.av-test.org/en/news/news-single-view/self-protection-for-antivirus-software/
RoHe
10 Elder
•
45.2K Posts
0
November 26th, 2014 16:00
Notice they didn't mention Microsoft Security Essentials or Windows Defender in that article?
Wonder why not... :emotion-40:
ky331
3 Apprentice
•
15.6K Posts
0
November 26th, 2014 17:00
I'm assuming it means they didn't test it. If they did --- even if it offered zer0 protection --- they could have cited such an abysmal result.
BTW, they only listed a paid version of avira, which is why I didn't include it in my list above.
RoHe
10 Elder
•
45.2K Posts
0
November 26th, 2014 17:00
That's my assumption too, but it's a pretty glaring omission.
joe53
2 Intern
•
5.8K Posts
0
November 26th, 2014 18:00
If AV-Test had been able to correlate the % of DEP and ASLR executable files in the various products with their own protection/ blocking/detection test results against real-world threats, I might be more impressed.
But they don't. So I'm unsure of the significance of these findings from a practical point of view. For example, Trend Micro scored only 71% in this test, yet scored 100% in AV-Test's own latest Sept-Oct Protection tests. The latest (Oct) AV- Comparatives real-world protection test also found TM blocked 100% of threats.
ZDNet's summary that "Your anti-malware system does you no good if it's successfully compromised.
If your anti-virus fails (e.g., is exploited/disabled by malware), then your computer is left unprotected." is a truism that generates FUD.
The original AV-Test article is a bit more honest in their summary:
"Nor is DEP (or NX-Bit) the ultimate protection of files, but authors of exploits are required to scale additional hurdles for this as well, which in turn means more effort.
It's often the sum of all [layered security] things that counts."
http://www.av-test.org/en/news/news-single-view/self-protection-for-antivirus-software/