Norton Internet Security / Norton AntiVirus

[denniz]

The latest results of retrospective/proactive testing done by AV-Comparatives is out now. NIS2009 got an advanced rating, but I kinda expected a somewhat better score. NIS2009 definitely did much better then it's NIS2008 predecessor, but there is still room for improvement.     

Go to the comparatives section at http://www.av-comparatives.org/ to read the report.

[TomiRed Super Spam Squasher]

Symantec is falling behind again. Scores on par with Microsoft OneCare.

This, and my recent experiments makes ditching the 60-70 US dollar NIS and opting for the free Microsoft antivirus Morro next year an increasingly likely outcome in my case.

I rarely get infected anyway.

[Dieselman743]

Where are you finding those results in the site? The only one listed when you go to comparatives is August 2008.

[denniz]

16 virusscanners were tested, the highest score over a 1 week period is 71%, while the lowest score is 18%. Over a 4 week period the highest score is 67%, while the lowest score is 8%. In both cases NIS2009 scored 44%, an average score if you look at the whole picture.    

[Quads]

20. Retrospective/ProActive Test, November 2008

Quads 

[denniz]

---

Dieselman743 wrote:
Where are you finding those results in the site? The only one listed when you go to comparatives is August 2008.

---

Look at number 20 in the below list.

[Dieselman743]

Says coming soon for me. Maybe its your area.

[Quads]

---

Dieselman743 wrote:
Says coming soon for me. Maybe its your area.

---

I can open it and read it.   I'm in New Zealand  (down by Austrailia, but not part of Australia).

Try doing a hard refresh "F5" key 

Quads 

Message Edited by Quads on 11-30-2008 10:47 AM

[Dieselman743]

Ok now its out and readable to me. All av companies did pretty poorly except for Avira is always but it also has tons of FP's. Norton has very few FP's.

[denniz]

For the people who are curious as what this specific retrospective/proactive test means:

The testers used the updates and definitions from the latest on-demand test (which was on the 4th of August 2008). After that they didn't update the definitions for 4 weeks. During the next 4 weeks they collected new malware. Then the testers test how good an antivirus product does with 4 week old definitions on the malware they collected after they stopped updating the definitions.

In short:

1) on the 4th of August they ran an on-demand test with the latest malware definitions at that time.

2) on the 4th of August they stopped updating the definitions.

3) they then collected new malware between the 4th of August and the 31th of August.

4) on the 1st of September they did an on-demand scan with 4 week old definitions which they took from the 4th of August.

Message Edited by denniz on 11-30-2008 12:12 AM