Norton is easier to hack?

[Jimmy9190]

Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
Concerning the free AV's, Zone Alarm did very well in that test.


I considered Zone Alarm too, but everything I read online said it does not work well at all with Firefox, which is the broswer I use. Avast is doing fine with FF.

 

[Mystic]

It is a mystery to me why some antivirus maker would not want to submit its products to all of the testing of an important organization like AVComparatives. It seems to me that the conclusion a person would be drawn to would be that they felt that their product might not look good in one of the tests. Or maybe they felt somehow that the test was not fair or not realistic. I don't know. But everybody else seemed to be willing to submit their products to the testing.

By the way I personally like AVComparatives better than AVTest. It seems that AVComparatives uses more malware samples, etc. Although I check the AVTest and VirusBulletin and West Coast Labs websites also. If you carefully example some of the testing by AVTest they seem to often use only about 100 malware samples or so. I can think of independent researchers who have used more malware examples than that. It fact I can think of a few independent reseachers who have used thousands of malware samples.

There is a lot more that I know and a lot more that I could say but I am just going to keep quiet. But I will be very slow to buy any antivirus product made by a company that does not want to submit its antivirus to all of the testing done by AVComparatives. Enough said.

 

[bubbajoe_2112]

Mystic,

Symantec finished #1 in the AV-Comparatives final test of 2011. It blocked 99.5% of threats thrown at it, the highest of all. What do you say to that?

Symantec finishes #1 in AV-Comparatives 2011 test

For 2012, AV-Comparatives changed the testing strategy in a way that Symantec feels doesn't represent real world threat scenarios and won't give an accurate measure of real world performance (e.g. "an unrealistic testing scenario", as you said). Therefore Symantec backed out. They really have nothing to prove, they finished #1 in 2011.

Enough said...

 

[Triple_Se7en]

Originally Posted By: Jimmy9190
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
Concerning the free AV's, Zone Alarm did very well in that test.


I considered Zone Alarm too, but everything I read online said it does not work well at all with Firefox, which is the broswer I use. Avast is doing fine with FF.




I have Firefox and the free Zone Alarm works fine.

The only thing Firefox 17 disabled was Zone Alarm Security Engine.... which is their toolbar, which I have no interest in anyways.

 

[Drew99GT]

bubbajoe, thanks for that link to av-test.org

Do you know any details of AVComparative's testing methodology that Norton disagrees with?

 

[bubbajoe_2112]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
bubbajoe, thanks for that link to av-test.org

Do you know any details of AVComparative's testing methodology that Norton disagrees with?


The file detection testing apparently is the only part they disagree with. I don't know what they (AV-comparatives) changed in that test for 2012. Neither AV-comparatives nor Symantec have given any indication what was changed in the file detection methodology. Symantec maintains that Real World detection and real world cleanup are far more important tests:

"Symantec has long been an advocate of independent “whole product” or “real-world” tests that most closely represent the interests of consumers and utilize all of the proactive technologies provided with a product, as opposed to “static” tests that only test an individual component. Currently AV-Comparatives does not offer a subscription focused solely on these “whole product” or “real-world” types of tests. At this time, Symantec has chosen not to subscribe to AV-Comparatives’ testing program for 2012. Our philosophy is to participate in tests that have high relevance and meaning for consumers, and most accurately align with their real-world need for comprehensive protection and machine cleanup from evolving online threats. We will continue to seek out and participate in a range of tests that meet these standards to measure our products’ efficacy and performance."

"As the threat landscape has changed, our protection and repair technologies have evolved and multiplied to protect against many new threat vectors. As a result, there is a need for a broader and more comprehensive set of tests, often called “whole product” or “real-world” tests, to measure this increased coverage and emulate the consumer experience. Additionally Symantec has also strongly supports remediation or “clean-up” tests where a computer is infected then a security product is tested to see how well it can remove the infection from the a computer. "

Norton forums

^^^ page 2 and page 4