Help
AVG, AntiVir and Avast are widely used programs so the arrival on the scene of Active Virus Shield is somewhat interesting because it is a service now being offered at no charge by AOL. There are some users do not like having anything from AOL on their computers but Kaspersky is generally regarded as one of the more reputable antivirus program. Still, some users posted that are hesitant to try Active Virus Shield after they've read the End-User License Agreement (EULA) bundled with the service by AOL.
To see the EULA of Active Virus Shield, please go to this topic and you'll find it posted by another of our CoU Members.
TESTING ENVIRONMENT:
- A PC with 2 hard drives. Windows XP is on Master Drive. Local Drive is C. The Slave drive contains data and/or executables. Both drives have infections. Most infections are known trojans, worms, virus and other type of malware (Not Zoo). Zoo is a threat that exists only in virus and antivirus labs, not in the wild. Most Zoo threats never get released into the wild and, as a result, rarely threaten users.
- Total # of infection: 140 confirmed known risks or infections (executables and infected files which contains virus, trojan, malware) and 30 infected emails (as attachments - some are password protected while others are not).
- Location of Infection: 140 infected files are on drive D. 30 infected emails in drive C - in Windows>Mail Directory. E-mail Client is Outlook Express.
- Infected files were gathered from users who sent the samples to me via email after I analyzed their HijackThis log. Some files were downloaded from the net. Others came with unsolicited emails in the form of phishing and spam with or without attachment (see image below)
PRODUCTS FOR TESTING: Freeware antivirus programs that offer and claim real-time protection.
TEST POLICY: No antivirus program is configured to HEAL, CLEAN, DELETE or MOVE to Quarantine any infection. Each antivirus program was configured only to SCAN, DETECT and then REPORT what it found during the scan and while it was running. Hard drive backup was created to ensure the same availability of infections each time I wished to run the test.
TEST 1: Active Virus Shield
About Active Virus Shield:
Detection result:
Active Virus Shield detected 157 out of 170 infections/risks. No False positive detections.
TEST 2: AntiVir
About AntiVir:
Detection result:
AntiVir detected 79 out of 170 infections/risks. 11 False positive detections.
TEST 3: Avast! Home Edition
About Avast!:
Detection result:
Avast! detected 104 out of 170 infections/risks. 1 False positive detection.
TEST 4: AVG Free
About AVG:
Detection result:
AVG Free detected 8 out of 170 infections/risks. No False positive detections.
Summary of Results:
- AntiVir detected 79 out of 170 infections/risks. 11 False positives. 26 infections found in Drive C, 53 infections in Drive D.
- Avast! detected 104 out of 170 infections/risks. 1 False positive. 27 infections found in Drive C, 77 infections in Drive D.
- Active Virus Shield detected 157 out of 170 infections/risks. No False positives. 30 infections found in Drive C, 127 infections in Drive D.
- AVG detected 8 out of 170 infections/risks. No False positives. 0 infection found in Drive C, 8 infections in Drive D. Please note that AVG's test result is "No Virus Found" after I ran "Scan My Computer". Selecting "Scan My Computer" is its method to scan all local drives. AVG Free only found infections when I ran a separate test by selecting "Shell Extension Test" for local drive. I ran the AVG scan many times (in 2 days!) to see if there is any difference with it's test results. See below image as proof that AVG scan was not done just once but quite a few times:
Please do not use the above as your basis for choosing which program you should use. The following reasons detail why:
1. The infected system is not infected with viruses alone. Please read the state of the system for information on what the risks were present on the system and how they reached it.
You should also read the software vendor's website to read what can be detected by their product.
2. Kindly note that some antivirus programs do not detect exploits, spyware, potential unwanted programs et al. In other terms, infections that are not categorized as "virus" are not detected by some antivirus software. For example, AVG (Free) will not detect potentially unwanted programs . Detections for those are only available in AVG's paid version. Whatever the limitations of standalone antivirus, it should be detecting known, in the wild viruses and any infected file that behaves like a virus (that is, if the heuristic engine is good enough to detect one).
3. Different antivirus programs use different methods and engines. Some scanners are fast, while others are slow. Some scanners will scan packed files while others will not. Some scanners do not scan password-protected archives, while others will scan them as long as the user running the scan and the system being scanned both have the proper permissions.
4. Detection result is not the only basis to review any security tool that detects virus. Real-time protection, Removal, EULA, Product Support and Product Updates/Response Time are the other areas to review and consider. Some antivirus may succeed in detection but will fail with removal and vice-versa. The above test is only a "detections" test. It does not include "cleaning" or "removal" tests nor does it include Real-time protection. All infections existed already prior to installation of the antivirus program, which may have affected any of the program's abilities to be able to detect specific infections.
5. There are some antivirus programs that will not detect any infection due to the user's settings. You should review the help file before running a scan. Example: Selecting "System Areas" in AVG means the scanner will be fast but it will not scan any files the engine classifies as "not changed" or apparently in the same state as at the time of the previous scan.
6. This test covered only a sample of 170 infections/risks that are in the wild or known. Since there is the presumption that not all antivirus programs are capable of catching all known viruses, it is possible that AVG (which performed very poorly on this particular test) might catch some viruses that Active Virus Shield won't be able to detect. However, since it is virtually impossible to test all the antivirus programs against the ever changing universe of viruses, this test should be considered just a sampling of the potential for the particular programs, not a definitive indictment against their abilities. We did not contact nor communicate with the program's authors regarding the findings of our tests, so we aren't aware if they may have any explanations concerning the relatively wide gap in performance.
7. The choice of your antivirus program should be made after you've conducted careful research. We do not support, represent nor endorse any particular product. Similarly, we do not recommend any user remove or stop using any particular product based upon the results of this test. Please do not accept the findings of our test to infer the superiority of one or the inferiority of another. Rather, please use this test to alert you that not all programs perform similarly.
8. We recommend visiting the websites linked below to view other recent results of Antivirus Testing, but please view them also with all of my comments above still in mind:Kindly view our Disclaimer on Product Reviews and Research
They were illuminating. 
Posted 22 August 2006 - 08:55 PM
Posted 23 August 2006 - 12:27 AM
i did not know about the difference between PE and Classic 
)
Posted 24 August 2006 - 06:34 AM
