Great results on CRDF threat center two days running at the top, with very good results previous on zero day protection. Keep up the the good work much appreciated.Also bear in mind this is against full av scanners.Link http://threatcenter.crdf.fr/?Stats
#1
Posted 09 January 2013 - 06:17 AM
#2
Posted 09 January 2013 - 08:38 AM
This report is very suspicious.I doubt that is true.Malwarebytes is amazing,but it cannot be better than Emsisoft,because they have dual engine Emsisoft+Bitdefender more than 13 milion signatures.Dont believe this companies,because a lot of them are paid to give that reports.On every other reports,situation is different.I am malware expert i had downloaded all kinds of malware from malwaredomainlist and malwareblacklist and i know what is good..Malwarebytes is very good,but not stronger than emsisoft.MSE is one of worst programs and in this report is better than Emsisoft...so funny.I use on my pc Emsisoft Internet security and MBAM Pro.greetings
#3
Posted 09 January 2013 - 02:26 PM
I am not going to post an opinion about the link posted above but I do have to comment on this.
This could be 13 quadrillion signatures and it would not matter. Mentioning signature count is a windows 98 era marketing tactic as back then it actually mattered. Modern malware changes so quickly that signatures more than a month old are virtually useless and once you get to a year out the only thing they hit are samples in malware collections used for testing.
The truth is that obsolete signatures are so useless that we frequently remove them from our database. The only thing they can do is make your scan slower so out they go.
There are exactly 2 statistics that matter when it comes to malware.
1. What can you stop at 0hour
2. If you miss at 0hour can you react faster than the threat can morph
We concentrate on these 2 and simply ignore the marketing fluff that does not translate into protection.
Quote
more than 13 milion signatures
This could be 13 quadrillion signatures and it would not matter. Mentioning signature count is a windows 98 era marketing tactic as back then it actually mattered. Modern malware changes so quickly that signatures more than a month old are virtually useless and once you get to a year out the only thing they hit are samples in malware collections used for testing.
The truth is that obsolete signatures are so useless that we frequently remove them from our database. The only thing they can do is make your scan slower so out they go.
There are exactly 2 statistics that matter when it comes to malware.
1. What can you stop at 0hour
2. If you miss at 0hour can you react faster than the threat can morph
We concentrate on these 2 and simply ignore the marketing fluff that does not translate into protection.
#4
Posted 09 January 2013 - 02:48 PM
Well put nosirrah....

Dell Precision T7500, Win7 Ultimate 64bit fully updated, McAfee Corp Edition v8.8,
Watchguard Firewall, Intel Xeon E5606CPU, Dual Quad Core Processors, 16GB Ram,
E5606 @ 2.13GHz, Nvidia Quadro NVS420, Raid-1 Dual 1TB Sata 10000 rpm Hard Drives
Dual DVD Burners, IE10, Opera, MBAM
#5
Posted 09 January 2013 - 08:07 PM
Well said Bruce, as always.
Good actions give strength to ourselves and inspire good actions in others.
-Plato-
-Plato-
#6
Posted 09 January 2013 - 10:21 PM
Stalker90 you continue posting almost the exact same statements in different posts. This is spamming and wont be tolerated...
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

Sign In
Create Account

Back to top









