[2.Bi-Weekly]IObit Security360/Ad-Aware/Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware/SAS/Spyware Doctor

[Kobe]

Free Anti-malware Comparison

 

On-demand Detection of malware

 

Test Report uploaded as a PDF document, download link:

http://www.wikifortio.com/764667/Test Report.pdf

 

Test Date: 12nd of September 2009

Test made by Kobe

 

 

 

 

Tested Products

 

- Ad-Aware Free Version 8.0.7.0

- IObit Security 360 Free Version 1.0

- Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware Free Version1.40.0.0

- Spyware Doctor limited Version 6.1.0.447

- SUPERAntiSpyware Free Version 4.27.0.1002

 

Test Method

 

The test contains two parts:

- Scanning speed and detection rate of smart (or quick) scan

- Scanning speed and detection rate of full scan.

 

All programs tested were updated (including programs and database version) and frozen on the 12th September 2009.

They were tested using their smart (or quick) scanning and full scanning capabilities.

In order to make all the programs to achieve their maximum detection rate of full scan, we do not use their default setting for scanning.

We tested them one by one, and we reverted to a clean snapshot of Virtual Machine after testing the installed anti-malware product.

 

System Configuration

 

Host Computer Environment

Operating System: Windows XP Professional SP3 64-bit

Processor: AMD Phenom 9650 Quad-Core

RAM: 4.00 GB

Hard Disk: Solid State Disk 300 GB

Test Environment

VMware Workstation 6.0.1613.0

Windows XP Professional SP3

Windows Vista Ultimate

 

Test Sample

 

We performed the test with total 1468 samples.

Samples consist of Trojans, Backdoors, Script, Malware, Windows viruses and uninfected files.

Location: C:\Documents and Settings\***\desktop\samples

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.serviceuptime.net/images/pics/1.jpg

[Kobe]

Test Results

 

Test Results on Windows XP SP3

 

Smart Scan Comparison Sheet

http://www.serviceuptime.net/images/pics/11.jpg

 

Full Scan Comparison Sheet

http://www.serviceuptime.net/images/pics/22.jpg

 

Graph of Samples Detection Rate

http://www.serviceuptime.net/images/pics/2.jpg

 

Graph of Scanning Speed (lower is better)

http://www.serviceuptime.net/images/pics/3.jpg

 

 

 

 

Test Report uploaded as a PDF document, download link:

http://www.wikifortio.com/764667/Test Report.pdf

[Kobe]

The Test Results on Windows Vista

 

Smart Scan Comparison Sheet

http://www.serviceuptime.net/images/pics/33.jpg

 

Full Scan Comparison Sheet

http://www.serviceuptime.net/images/pics/44.jpg

 

Graph of Samples Detection Rate

http://www.serviceuptime.net/images/pics/4.jpg

 

Graph of Scanning Speed (lower is better)

http://www.serviceuptime.net/images/pics/5.jpg

 

 

 

 

Test Report uploaded as a PDF document, download link:

http://www.wikifortio.com/764667/Test Report.pdf

[Kobe]

I and my brother finally completed this test report. After knowing this test, we began to prepare.

It cost us so much time to test, and then we sat up all night to make the test report.

We are not any genius at all but we would try our best to continue...Our ultimate goal is win a mega prize! lol :lol:

Come on, my buddy; please give our job your score, suggestions or appraisal.

Ta :-P

[solbjerg]

Hi Kobe

Very, very good!

Well set up and with good explanations of the testing environment.

 

The only thing I wondered about was your samples - you performed the test with a total of 1468 samples, consisting of Trojans, Backdoors, Scripts, Malware, Windows viruses and uninfected files.

Are the Rogues in the Malware?

And how would the detection percentage be if uninfected files isn't used for reference? Likewise if the viruses isn't used for reference in generating the percentage.

Otherwise it is an ultimate comparison, - the only way to make it even better is to have more spyware/malware detection programs in the comparison.

 

Cheers

solbjerg

 

I and my brother finally completed this test report. After knowing this test, we began to prepare.

It cost us so much time to test, and then we sat up all night to make the test report.

We are not any genius at all but we would try our best to continue...Our ultimate goal is win a mega prize! lol :lol:

Come on, my buddy; please give our job your score, suggestions or appraisal.

Ta :-P

[wozofoz]

Come on, my buddy; please give our job your score, suggestions or appraisal.

Ta :-P

 

Score: Tops (done)

Suggestion: Keep up the good work

Appraisal: Thankyou, I actually understood it. There is no higher praise :grin:

 

Oh dear, where are my manners. Welcome to the forum :smile:

 

All the best, woz of oz

[Shiw Liang]

Very interesting!Seeing that test show me how you like to help for some certain reasons but I learn lots of things with these images and explanations thank you so much I am really glad to see how much you are supporting IOBit Security 360

[Kobe]

Hi Kobe

Very, very good!

Well set up and with good explanations of the testing environment.

 

The only thing I wondered about was your samples - you performed the test with a total of 1468 samples, consisting of Trojans, Backdoors, Scripts, Malware, Windows viruses and uninfected files.

Are the Rogues in the Malware?

And how would the detection percentage be if uninfected files isn't used for reference? Likewise if the viruses isn't used for reference in generating the percentage.

Otherwise it is an ultimate comparison, - the only way to make it even better is to have more spyware/malware detection programs in the comparison.

 

Cheers

solbjerg

 

Hi solbjerg,

Yup, the rogues are in the malware, during the testing, we find that 360 define them as "Misleading". What's up?

Your question about samples is the key point. We downloaded these total 1468 samples from some forums and malware research center. Due to the fair, we did not change or delete any of them, but 2% of the samples may be rubbish files or some viruses that had been corrupted because of packer. Whether add these 2% uninfected files (at last we defined it as uninfected files) or not, I had argued with my brother for a long time. You know that we are not expert.:???:

We believe that under the same condition, tested these program with the same samples are fair, so the detection percentage are objective only for this test report. For making the result more referential, we will improve next time, but our rating would be down this time.:roll:

[solbjerg]

Hi Kobe

Just wanted to know where the rogues were.

It would also be interesting to know about False Positives detected for each application.

And about the viruses you should bear in mind that IS360 is NOT an antivirus program - it is primarily a spyware/malware program.

Perhaps with some overlap I think.

The detection rate/percentage surprised me a little, that's why I asked.

The more we know about the methods and criteria, the better it is.

We are not experts or professionals either - most of us you are talking to in the forum - we are users like you - just trying to help out.

Don't worry (too much :-) ) - you have done a very fine job!!

Cheers

solbjerg

 

Hi solbjerg,

Yup, the rogues are in the malware, during the testing, we find that 360 define them as "Misleading". What's up?

Your question about samples is the key point. We downloaded these total 1468 samples from some forums and malware research center. Due to the fair, we did not change or delete any of them, but 2% of the samples may be rubbish files or some viruses that had been corrupted because of packer. Whether add these 2% uninfected files (at last we defined it as uninfected files) or not, I had argued with my brother for a long time. You know that we are not expert.:???:

We believe that under the same condition, tested these program with the same samples are fair, so the detection percentage are objective only for this test report. For making the result more referential, we will improve next time, but our rating would be down this time.:roll:

[samr]

Hi kobe,

To add to solbjerg's comment, vote rating is not everything that is considered according to the rules. Ask SeeR!

samr.

[enoskype]

That reminds me the idiom. :idea:

 

"You don't have to be mad, but if you are, it helps!!!"

 

Cheers.:lol:

[solbjerg]

not Confucianists

 

If you are a Confucianist it surely helps to go quitely mad in order to be able to bend the rules :-)

Cheers

solbjerg

 

 

That reminds me the idiom. :idea:

 

"You don't have to be mad, but if you are, it helps!!!"

 

Cheers.:lol:

[00firestar00]

this is a wonderful test. graphs make it all that better. it seems to me that vista ultimate could be safer than windows xp pro. when scanning on vista, the scan times seems shorter, with about 10% higher infections found. your results prove the weakness of spydoc. my parents bought the full version of that program trying to fix a malware problem (you can view my test). they ended up getting thier money back after i scanned and removed all the threats with S360 and malwarebytes.

 

great job, love the graphs and tables. 5 stars *****

 

on a side note to anyone who could answer,

is Iobit going to make S360 an antivirus program? i would like to be able to rid myself of symantec, but S360 doesnt catch all viruses just yet.

 

EDIT:No, IS 360 is going to be used together with an AV program.

[firevas]

Wonderful work Kobe.........Looks very professional......Fantastic job.......! :)

[RNI2020]

The application removes more as only bad stuff

[enoskype]

Bump to get the bi-weekly contenders together.