30-01-2013, 12:12 PM
PC Anti-Virus Protection 2011
1PC Anti-Virus.pdf (Size: 853.16 KB / Downloads: 26)
INTRODUCTION
This test aims to compare the effectiveness of the most recent releases of popular anti-virus software1. 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.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
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.
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.
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 .
OVERALL ACCURACY
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.
OVERALL PROTECTION
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 in 1. 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).
PROTECTION DETAILS
The security products provided different levels of protection. When a product defended against a threat, it
prevented the malware from gaining a foothold on the target system. A threat might have been able to infect
the system and, in some cases, the product neutralized it later. When it couldn’t, the system was
compromised.
The graph below shows that the most successful products tended to defend, rather than neutralize, the
threats. Between them the top five products only neutralized 11 threats, while they defended a total of 178.
They were compromised 11 times. The five least effective products, on the other hand, neutralized 21 threats
and defended just 123. They were compromised a total of 56 times.