PC Anti-Virus Protection 2011

Jean-Christophe Simon

Sujets

• Arts

Informations

• Publié par: onytodor
• Nombre de lectures: 24
• Langue: Français

Extrait





PC Anti-Virus Protection 2011

12  P OPULAR A NTI -V IRUS P ROGRAMS C OMPARED F OR E FFECTIVENESS  Dennis Technology Labs, 03/08/2010 www.DennisTechnologyLabs.com This test aims to compare the effectiveness of the most recent releases of popular anti-virus software 1 . The products include those from Kaspersky, McAfee, Microsoft, Norton (Symantec) and Trend Micro, as well as free versions from Avast, AVG and Avira. Other products include those from BitDefender, ESET, G-Data and K7. The tests were conducted between 07/07/2010 and 22/07/2010 using the most up to date versions of the software available. A total of 12 products were exposed to genuine internet threats that real customers could have encountered during the test period. Crucially, this exposure was carried out in a realistic way, reflecting a customers experience as closely as possible. For example, each test system visited real, infected websites that significant numbers of internet users were encountering at the time of the test. These results reflect what would have happened if those users were using one of the seven products tested. E XECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Q Products that block attacks early tended to protect the system more fully The nature of web-based attacks means that the longer malware has access to a system, the more chances it has of downloading and installing further threats. Products that blocked the malicious and infected websites from the start reduced the risk of compromise by secondary and further downloads. Q   100 per cent protection is rare  This test recorded an average protection rate of 87.5 per cent. New threats appear online frequently and it is inevitable that there will be times when specific security products are unable to protect from some of these threats. Q   The products rarely blocked the installation of legitimate applications There were a number of cases in which the anti-virus programs warned against allowing legitimate applications full access to the system and the network. However, they rarely blocked these applications from installing .

 1 latest available products were used in the test:The Avast! Free AntiVirus 5 AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition 9 Avira Personal - Free Antivirus 10 BitDefender Internet Security 2010 ESET Smart Security 4 G Data InternetSecurity 2011  C Anti-Virus Protection 2011 

Simon Edwards, Dennis Technology Labs 

K7 Total Security 10 Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 McAfee Internet Security 2010 Microsoft Security Essentials Norton Internet Security 2011 Trend Micro Internet Security 2010

age 1 of 6

 C ONTENTS 







Executive summary ........................................................................................................................................ 1   Contents ......................................................................................................................................................... 2   1. Overall Accuracy........................................................................................................................................ 3   2.OverallProtection......................................................................................................................................5   3. Protection Details....................................................................................................................................... 7   4. False Positives............................................................................................................................................. 9   5.Thetests...................................................................................................................................................14   6.Testdetails................................................................................................................................................16   7.Conclusions..............................................................................................................................................20   Appendix A: Terms...................................................................................................................................... 21   Appendix B: Legitimate Samples.................................................................................................................. 22   Appendix C: Threat report .......................................................................................................................... 26   Appendix D: Tools....................................................................................................................................... 59   Appendix E: Terms of the test ..................................................................................................................... 60   

C Anti-Virus Protection 2011

age 2 of 6

 1.  O VERALL A CCURACY 



Each product has been scored for its accuracy in detecting and handling malware. We awarded two points for defending against a threat, one for neutralizing it and deducted two points every time a product allowed the system to be compromised. The reason behind this score weighting is to give credit to products that deny malware an opportunity to tamper with the system and to penalize those that allow malware to damage it. In some of our test cases a compromised system was made unstable, or even unusable without expert knowledge. Even if active malware was removed, we considered such damaged systems to count as being compromised. The Norton product defended against all threats so it scores a full 80 marks. It was the only product to avoid being compromised by the internet threats. Kaspersky's product came a close second, losing points due to neutralizing two threats and being compromised by one.

The Symantec (Norton) product was the only one to protect against all the internet threats used. 



C Anti-Virus Protection 2011

age of 6



 ACCURACY SCORES Product Norton Internet Security 2011 Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 ESET Smart Security 4 Avast! Free AntiVirus 5 G Data InternetSecurity 2011 Avira Personal - Free Antivirus 10 Trend Micro Internet Security 2010 AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition 9 BitDefender Internet Security 2010 McAfee Internet Security Microsoft Security Essentials K7 Total Security 10 



C Anti-Virus Protection 2011



Target Defended 40 37 34 35 32 29 23 23 29 23 22 20



Target Neutralized 0 2 4 2 3 4 11 11 2 6 4 5

Target Overall Compromised Accuracy 0 80 1 74 2 68 3 66 5 57 7 48 6 45 6 45 9 42 11 30 14 20 15 15

age 4 of 6

 2.  O VERALL P ROTECTION 



The following illustrates the general level of protection provided by each of the security products, combining the defended and neutralized incidents into an overall figure. This figure is not weighted with an arbitrary scoring system as it was in1. Overall accuracy. The average protection levels afforded by the tested products, when exposed to the threats used in this test, was 87.5 per cent. Above average products included those from Symantec (Norton), Kaspersky, ESET, Avast! And G Data. Only one of these was free (Avast).

The only free product that performed above average was Avast! Free AntiVirus 5. 



C Anti-Virus Protection 2011



age 5 of 6



 OVERALL PROTECTION SCORES Product Protected Incidents Norton Internet Security 2011 40 Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 39 ESET Smart Security 4 38 Avast! Free AntiVirus 5 37 G Data InternetSecurity 2011 35 AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition 9 34 Trend Micro Internet Security 2010 34 Avira Personal - Free Antivirus 10 33 BitDefender Internet Security 2010 31 McAfee Internet Security 29 Microsoft Security Essentials 26 K7 Total Security 10 25



C Anti-Virus Protection 2011

Percentage of incidents 100% 98% 95% 93% 88% 85% 85% 83% 78% 73% 65% 63%

(Average: 87.5 per cent)

age of 6