Even as AMTSO attempts to bring some qualified and competent guidance to testing methodologies, and individuals with an agenda or paranoia invent stories about why it is not good, we see more completely incompetent testing. I refer this time to the test that Steve Ragan wrote about at http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/201031/5979/Anti-Virus-industry-lacking-when-it-comes-to-detection-says-report. The test performed by Cyveillance, who

All this is potentially frightening and inconvenient (or worse) for a home user. And if it happens in a corporate environment, it can be very, very expensive to remedy. So while some of the public comments we see in the wake of such incidents may seem over the top, “FP rage” is certainly understandable.

As I mentioned here yesterday, I launched a new AMTSO in the Media page on the AMTSO blog page yesterday. Since then, Pedro Bustamente has kindly sent me a whole bunch of links relating to events leading up to the launch of AMTSO in 2008, so I’ve created a separate sub-page incorporating those links out

Who would have thought that an initiative aimed at increasing the accuracy and relevance of anti-malware testing would be quite so controversial? Well, it was to be expected that AMTSO (the Anti-Malware Testing Standards Organization) would generate a certain amount of controversy: clearly, the organization is not going to get everything right first time. And

No-one believes that AMTSO has all the answers and can “fix” testing all by itself, but it has compiled and generated resources that have made good testing practice far more practicable and understandable. The way for testers (and others) to improve those resources is by talking to and working with AMTSO in a spirit of co-operation: the need for transparency is not going to go away.

…Somewhere in this welter of misinformation, well-meant but muddled thinking, and black propaganda, there are some issues that need clarifying… Watch this space for further information. And while you’re waiting, you might want to check the documentation and other resources at the AMTSO web site to see what the organization really proposes and what it is really trying to achieve…

Further to my "top ten of top tens" post, I was encouraged by some queries to revisit the “Top Ten Mistakes Made When Evaluating Anti-Malware Software” list quoted by Kevin Townsend here. As it was an AMTSO issue and most of the queries have related to an AMTSO blog post, I've returned to it (and

Well, not exactly, though actually a top ten of top tens isn't a bad idea: apparently, top tens usually attract plenty of readers.  As do top fives. twenties etc, though probably not top thirteens. Security Memes a Lot to Me Still, there is a touch of recursion to this post. I got a notification from

Kevin Townsend asks whether AMTSO (the Anti-Malware Testing Standards Organization) is “a serious attempt to clean up anti-malware testing; or just a great big con?” I posted a lengthy response to that on the AMTSO blog here…

Of course, most vendors use in-house testing as a tool for monitoring and improving the capabilities of their own products. However, it’s also being used increasingly as a vehicle for showcasing a company’s own AV products in the best possible light.