Norton Internet Security / Norton AntiVirus

[huwyngr Norton Fighter]

Both ... if you think about it.

One was a statement of fact; the other was a reference to a positive statement made by the person I was replying to and I did not just say  "none of us can really know."

Here's what I actually said:

<< But more important none of us can really know what or how they changed unless we have hacked their coding and the servers upon which detection depends. >>

[joen]

> One was a statement of fact

What was the "statement of fact"?

[huwyngr Norton Fighter]

Read the message and use your biocomputer.

[ruiplacido]

I'm very disappointed with Symantec decision in did not want to take the File Detection Test of AV-Comparatives.

For that, my confidence in NIS drastically reduced and decided to change to the obvious competitor: not so light to the PC resources, but with sandbox feature and verified protection (the most important).

Regards.

[ALiasEX]

AV-Test has released Jul/Aug tests. http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/julaug-2012/

Yet again Norton has the best score in the Real-World Testing. They have had the best score for at least a whole year! (I have not checked before Jul/Aug 2011)

[huwyngr Norton Fighter]

---

ALiasEX wrote:

AV-Test has released Jul/Aug tests. http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/julaug-2012/

Yet again Norton has the best score in the Real-World Testing. They have had the best score for at least a whole year! (I have not checked before Jul/Aug 2011)

---

Maybe we need to change the title of this thread ... ?

Any information on why Jul/Aug was done on XP while May/June was on Windows 7 ? I thought at one time it was stated they had used XP to provide the worst platform for penetration but if they decided to use WIndows 7 as a current version I wonder why they went back?

With the format I see now I don't see the detailed background.

[Bombastus]

Windows 7 has just now passed XP in number of users, so tests using the XP platform are still valid for a huge userbase.

Also, if you are testing security products, it can be a good idea to use outdated and unpatched operative systems and software. If you test an exploit to see how security programs protects against it, it actually is not good to do that on a Windows where Microsoft has already patched the vulnerability away, for example, because then the protection score would be 100% for all the products tested, but in reality the exploit would never have been tested against the actual security programs.

[huwyngr Norton Fighter]

Bombastus,

I was aware of all that from what they had said before but I wondered why they were flip-flopping which is not good statistical practice for comparing products ... after all WIndows 7 is not exactly free of holes <s>

But I was asking if AV had said anything about it.