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.
The Hype-free blog at http://hype-free.blogspot.com/2009/12/congratulation-to-av-comparatives.html yesterday mentioned the latest AV-Comparatives round of test reports, including: The whole product dynamic test at http://www.av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews/dynamic-tests The December 2009 performance test at http://www.av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews/performance-tests The summary reports at http://www.av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews/main-tests/summary-reports I have a pretty jaundiced view of testing organizations in general: after all, I see some pretty awful tests proclaimed by the
The AMTSO (Anti-Malware Testing Standards Organization) meeting in Prague, which took place at the beginning of this week, proved to be rather more exciting than you might expect from a group with the word "Standards" in its name. One of the issues that caused particularly lively debate centred around the question of what constitutes AMTSO
Virus Bulletin have announced the results of a trial run of its new anti-spam product testing, where one product scored platinum, two scored gold, and two scored silver, based on their average scores in the test. However, you won’t actually get to know which products they were on this occasion: quite rightly, VB has anonymised the results