• All Community
    • All Community
    • Forums
    • Ideas
    • Blogs
Advanced

Not what you are looking for? Ask the experts!

Kudos0

Any Independent Lab Tests of NS in the Works?

Does anyone know if Norton has contracted with an independent lab to do a thorough test of NS.

(Yeah I've seen PC Mag review which was very limited and NS didn't exactly shine on it. (I don't have a lot of confidence in his tests, they often differ substantially from long term,larger sample independent lab tests - sometimes better, sometimes worse.) I know NIS did very well in independent tests but this is not NIS, and, although I would expect it to be at least as good if not better than NIS, there may be something about NS / a quirk in NS that in the real world will make it more or less effective than NIS

Would like to see something substantial from an independent lab before shelling out $90.

I do love the way it runs on my machine. It's invisible in it's functioning. (So my shut down is maybe a minute longer sometimes less - don't care about that and I'm sure that will be taken care of), but everything else, particularly  web browsing, runs like there is no A/V on my PC.

Replies

Kudos0

Re: Any Independent Lab Tests of NS in the Works?

I too would like to see some independent comparison tests ... but rather than tests that are contracted by a specific company ... I would like to see truly independent tests that compare all/most of the leading security products.

In addition, I would like to see tests that compare protection provided by various products when the computer under test does not have an active internet connection. Since Norton Security depends upon cloud-based behavioral protections, it has a potential exposure if an executable runs (and performs suspicions actions) while the computer does not have an active internet connection. I would like to see Norton Security's level of protection (when no active network connection is available) compared to the other well-known products (when they too have no active network connection).

Kudos1 Stats

Re: Any Independent Lab Tests of NS in the Works?

One test is commissioned by Symantec and the rest are sponsored by Symantec. One is a performance test. All links lead to a PDF.

AV-Test.org: http://www.norton.com/avtest2015

Dennis Technology Labs: http://dennistechnologylabs.com/reports/s/a-m/symantec/DTL_TAMP2015_SYMC...

http://www.dennistechnologylabs.com/av-protection2015.pdf

PassMark Software: http://passmark.com/ftp/internetsecuritysuites-sep2014.pdf

Kudos0

Re: Any Independent Lab Tests of NS in the Works?

Very impressive :-)

About that bad YouTube Detection Test: Watched a new series of tests on YouTube The guy not only runs a full scan, but then also tries to open each file that Norton didn't detect on the scan and even runs Power Ersaer. While there were others that scored higher Norton score over 85% detection and the reviewer stated that he was "very happy with NS." He said it's one current weakness are detecting VBS Scripts.

I also watched his tests of other products

His tests are long and thorough. He doesn't use voice so you have to watch closlely, but he does type an easy to read summary after each section that is cumulative.

His channel is http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzecdEBFi7mHwRpzBwFPRag

It appears he only does scanning detection and behavior blocker tests. I don't think we have to be concerned about NS's download blocking abilities."-) And if you have a clean machine and or run it through other scanning engines both free downloads and online scans for  reassurance, If you use NIS or NS, I don't think on demand scanning is important at all. (There is now a fix for the most likely form of BadUSB which blocks and warns you of any attempt to install a new keyboard on your PC, which is the most likely form of attack via BadUsb to gain control of your PC. It's a free down load from another security vendor and I'm not sure it's OK to post the link here. It's been around for a while and should be easy to find. You can search for "USB Keyboard Security Guard" and find it. It's by a reputable foreign company--you will know it when you see it.)

Kudos2 Stats

Re: Any Independent Lab Tests of NS in the Works?

ALiasEX:

Thanks for the links. I looked at all of the tests. Some comments:

AV-Test ("A test commissioned by Symantec Corporation"):

  • For all tests, the following requirement was given:
    "The Internet should be available to all tested products that use the cloud as part of their protection strategy."
    Does AV-Test assume that people do not use their computers (and thus do not need protection) when they are either purposely offline, or have lost their active internet connection?? Perhaps points should have been deducted from any products that cannot properly protect a PC that does not have an active internet connection.
  • AV-Test concluded:
    "From the different tests there is no clear number one product. G Data was the only product with aperfect score for remediation, real-world protection and exploit protection but adds more overhead in the performance testing. Kaspersky on the other hand had a nearly perfect score for remediation, a perfect score for real-world protection and a perfect performance testing score but missed two exploit test cases. The Norton product missed two points in the remediation test but scored perfect in all other tests."


Dennis Technology ("This test was sponsored by Symantec. The products selected for this test were chosen by Symantec.")

  • Norton Security was only compared to free products. Other well-known products (not free) were conspicuously absent from the tests.
  • For both tests, Dennis Technology concluded:
    "Norton Security scored highest in terms of malware protection. Avast! Free Antivirus came a close second."


Passmark ("Symantec Corporation funded the production of this report, selected the test metrics and list of products to include in this report, and supplied some of the test scripts used for the tests.")

  • Passmark tested boot time (Norton Security came in 5th out of 9 products ... PCs with Norton Security took about 30% longer to boot than the 1st place product). It's a shame that Passmark did not test shut-down time ... the currently unsolved problems with Norton Security causing long shut-down times might have been discovered (and fixed) before NS was released.
  • Norton Security clearly came out on top in the Passmark Test (with a score of 155 out of a possible 207 ... which on a straight grade basis would be a 75%). However, Passmark seems to have given every test criteria equal weight. So, Installation Time and Installation Size (NS came in 1st and 2nd respectively) were made equally important as Boot Time (NS was 5th), Scan Time (NS was 4th), PCMark (NS was 4th).

One comparison that all of the above commissioned/sponsored tests fail to perform was NIS 2014 vs. NS 2015. It would be interesting to see if NS is really significantly better than NIS in protection, performance, and usability. Perhaps some truly independent comparison sites will perform that comparison. I believe this is a valid comparison to make since Symantec's customers are being given the choice of upgrading to NS (approx $80) or remaining on their current product. It would be nice to know how Norton Security compared to the older products.

Kudos0

Re: Any Independent Lab Tests of NS in the Works?

ALiasEX:

Thanks for the links. I looked at all of the tests. Some comments:

AV-Test ("A test commissioned by Symantec Corporation"):

  • For all tests, the following requirement was given:
    "The Internet should be available to all tested products that use the cloud as part of their protection strategy."
    Does AV-Test assume that people do not use their computers (and thus do not need protection) when they are either purposely offline, or have lost their active internet connection?? Perhaps points should have been deducted from any products that cannot properly protect a PC that does not have an active internet connection.
  • AV-Test concluded:
    "From the different tests there is no clear number one product. G Data was the only product with aperfect score for remediation, real-world protection and exploit protection but adds more overhead in the performance testing. Kaspersky on the other hand had a nearly perfect score for remediation, a perfect score for real-world protection and a perfect performance testing score but missed two exploit test cases. The Norton product missed two points in the remediation test but scored perfect in all other tests."


Dennis Technology ("This test was sponsored by Symantec. The products selected for this test were chosen by Symantec.")

  • Norton Security was only compared to free products. Other well-known products (not free) were conspicuously absent from the tests.
  • For both tests, Dennis Technology concluded:
    "Norton Security scored highest in terms of malware protection. Avast! Free Antivirus came a close second."


Passmark ("Symantec Corporation funded the production of this report, selected the test metrics and list of products to include in this report, and supplied some of the test scripts used for the tests.")

  • Passmark tested boot time (Norton Security came in 5th out of 9 products ... PCs with Norton Security took about 30% longer to boot than the 1st place product). It's a shame that Passmark did not test shut-down time ... the currently unsolved problems with Norton Security causing long shut-down times might have been discovered (and fixed) before NS was released.
  • Norton Security clearly came out on top in the Passmark Test (with a score of 155 out of a possible 207 ... which on a straight grade basis would be a 75%). However, Passmark seems to have given every test criteria equal weight. So, Installation Time and Installation Size (NS came in 1st and 2nd respectively) were made equally important as Boot Time (NS was 5th), Scan Time (NS was 4th), PCMark (NS was 4th).

One comparison that all of the above commissioned/sponsored tests fail to perform was NIS 2014 vs. NS 2015. It would be interesting to see if NS is really significantly better than NIS in protection, performance, and usability. Perhaps some truly independent comparison sites will perform that comparison. I believe this is a valid comparison to make since Symantec's customers are being given the choice of upgrading to NS (approx $80) or remaining on their current product. It would be nice to know how Norton Security compared to the older products.

  All good points,  geek47 !

A little bit of knowledge is... well a little bit of knowledge.
Kudos0

Re: Any Independent Lab Tests of NS in the Works?

ALiasEX:

Some more PDFs

Yeah, I posted Product Suggestion for adding features of Safe Pay Permalink and / or Safe Money Permalink  

No one agree

Kudos0

Re: Any Independent Lab Tests of NS in the Works?

https://community.norton.com/en/forums/norton-security-scores-aaa-rating-dennis-lab-test

Thanks to Send of Jive and ALiasEX, for the reminder of the result achieved by Norton.

Windows 10 Home X 64 Norton Security Premium Current

This thread is closed from further comment. Please visit the forum to start a new thread.