Off topic - AntiVirus accuracy competition

[Hugo van der Kooij]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Stephen Swaney wrote:

> This is definitely off topic but I know that many of you will be interested
> in the results since which virus scanners to buy is an often discussed topic
> here. A quote from the article in the link below will explain.
>
> "A rare AntiVirus accuracy competition was conducted at Linuxworld this
> week, and the results should come as a blow to the paid antivirus industry.
> Run by delegates from the untangle network gateway, the competition should
> provide ammunition to critics of the idea that good virus protection cannot
> be provided for nothing. . . ."
>
> http://www.builderau.com.au/blogs/byteclub/viewblogpost.htm?p=339270831
>
> And the results:
>
> 1. Kaspersky (97.1%)
> 2. ClamAV (91.4%)
> 3. Norton (88.6%)
> 4. F-Prot (85.7%), and
> 4. Sophos (85.7%)
> 6. McAfee (74.3%)
> 7. SonicWall (54.3%)
> 8. GlobalHauri (45.7%), and
> 8. Fortinet (45.7%)
> 10. Watchguard (2.9%)
>
> I hope none of you are using 6. or below.

Not quite like the results I get from a sample collection which covers 
about anything being around for first half of this year. I am rebuilding a 
malware crossrefernce and the new setup is at http://test.viruspool.net/

I plan to move it over to the main site after I rewrote the virus search 
page itself from scratch. The backend is good now but the webpage needs a 
full rewrite now to use the extended database in a much smarter way.

The short summary? I find Kaspersky and F-Prot doing rather badly compared 
to the list you quote.

Hugo.

-- 
 	hvdkooij at vanderkooij.org	http://hugo.vanderkooij.org/
 	    This message is using 100% recycled electrons.

 	Some men see computers as they are and say "Windows"
 	I use computers with Linux and say "Why Windows?"
 		(Thanks JFK, for the insight.)