Security Software Often Misses New Malware

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
While this isn’t exactly shocking, it still really sucks. I know you can’t expect anti-virus software to work instantly against new malware but the results of this study are downright scary.

Security software from major vendors can take an average of two days to block a Web site designed to attack a computer visiting it, according to the latest report from NSS Labs, which tested security software suites against fresh malware released on the Internet.
Click to expand...
 
Ugh. An advertisement for a paid report masquerading as a press release. They keep referring to the best performing product without naming it. :mad:

So... heuristics don't work and whitelisting is still the best way to go?

Alternatively, if you wait three days after learning about a new site to go there, you should be OK too. ;)
 
ugg you know what they need to testproof these things with? indians and cricket matches.

i have used mcafee, norton, symantec, avg, avast, antivir, MSE/essentials, nod32, modified hosts files, windows defender, kapersky... none of them are powerful enough for the hindu cricket test.

lol.

seriously, how many times can a veterinarian break their computer in a year? is it worth risking all of your business and livelyhood for "free cricket matches"? why not just pay like 20$ a mo and subscribe to a service lol
 
Look at the list of junk they are scanning with

NSS Labs rated AVG's Internet Security Business Edition and Panda Security's Internet Security as "caution." The full results are contained in NSS Labs' report, "Endpoint Protection Products Group Test Report, Socially-Engineered Malware," which costs US$495. Also covered in the report are Eset, F-Secure, Kaspersky, McAfee, Norman, Sophos, Symantec, Trend Micro.
Click to expand...
No wonder they are missing a ton of malware. The onlything decent in that list is Eset.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top