|
AV-Test release latest results
（AV-TEST发布了最新的测试结果）
Independent testing body AV-Test.org has released the results of a major comparative of suite products, with many vendors' 2009 editions included in the results. The test covers a range of metrics, including detection rates over various types of malware including adware and spyware, false positive rates, scanning speed, proactive detection, and response times to outbreaks.
独立测试组织AV-TEST最近发布了主要套装产品比较的结果，其中也包括了很多厂商2009版本的产品。这项测试涵盖了很多领域的度量，包括对于恶意软件，广告软件，间谍软件的侦测率，误报率，扫描速度，未知防御，以及对于病毒爆发的反应时间。
In terms of pure detection rates in on-demand scanning, a beta version of GDATA's AVK 2009 topped the charts for both 'malware' (measured against 1,164,662 samples) and 'ad- and spyware' (94,291 samples), with Avira's Premium Security Suite 2008 a close runner-up in the former category and F-Secure 2009 placing second in the latter. Secure Computing's Webwasher gateway product, based on the Avira engine with some in-house heuristics, came third in both categories.
仅仅就纯粹的扫描侦测率而言，AVK2009（BETA)在恶意软件（总共1，164，662样本）和广告/间谍软件（总共94，291样本）都是表现最优秀的，AVIRA 2008套装（红伞）仅仅相差一点点，F-SECURE 2009 排在第二名。WEBWASHER网管产品（红伞的引擎加上一些自己的启发）排在第三名。
Other areas analysed were scored on a five-point scale from very good to very poor. 'Proactive' protection included scanning of files discovered after the freezing of products, and executing unrecognised malware to test behavioural protection. Products rating 'good' or better in every category include Avira's premium suite (the popular free version has less complete spyware detection), AVK 2009, F-Secure's 2009 suite, Symantec's Norton I.S. 2009 (still in beta) and Sophos's Security Suite 2.5.
其他的则是以5分的模式来评分，从很好到很差。未知防御包括扫描那些在产品冻结后才发现的威胁以及运行那些未被识别出的恶意软件来测试基于行为的保护。在每个范围里都获得好或者更好的产品有：红伞套装（免费版本的间谍软件检测率不好），AVK2009,F-SECURE2009套装，诺顿NIS2009（仍然是BETA）以及SOPHOS 2.5套装。
The test also included keeping a record of the number of updates released over a four-week period. Of course, these numbers on their own cannot be used to measure the quality of the products involved, but were recorded out of interest. The most interesting data to emerge from this measurement was that the 2009 version of Norton topped the table with an impressive 6,202 incremental micro-updates, issued several times per hour, while Kaspersky came a distant second with a mere 696. Half of the 34 products tested had fewer than 100, including those from McAfee (21) and Trend Micro (30).
这项测试也包括了记录在四周的时间内每个产品说发布的更新数量。当然，各自产品的更新数量不能用来衡量产品质量的好坏，但是处于兴趣，我们记录了一下。最最有趣的数据就是诺顿NIS2009产品更新数量遥遥领先，有多达6，202次小更新，每小时有几次更新，卡巴斯基的更新数量排在第二名，但是只有696次。本测试的34个产品有一半都只有小于100次的更新，其中麦咖啡21次，趋势科技30次更新。
A summary of the major areas tested is printed below; hover over the product names to see full version information.
测试的主要范围总结如下：
个人总结：诺顿NIS2009采用了很多新技术，其中PULSE UPDATE功能，使铁壳用户实时保持更新，看来诺顿每年的进步很大，记得06产品是每周才更新一次，08每天更新3次，现在09服务器一有更新，就马上自动接受，不论其他的进步和改进，至少诺顿在很努力地进步中，加油。。。
看了很多国外的权威评测，诺顿的查杀率虽然比红伞，卡巴，或者其他一些双引擎的怪物差一些，基本上也有高达96%左右的查杀率，在加上诺顿本身的稳定，防御能力（加强的SONAR+BROWSER PROTECTION+09新的启发式+ANTIBOT的新功能）铁壳是仅次于NOD32，在通过VB100的次数上（至少VB100说明了杀软对于流行病毒的有效性，还是一个不错的参考）+诺顿一贯的低误杀率，09改进很大，现在唯一的问题是诺顿在中国本土的查杀率不符合国际最大安全厂商的地位，相信09年的四川中国安全中心正式运营后，会慢慢改善起来的，相信NIS2010更加强大。。。
大家留意一下RISING(瑞星），勇气还是值得表扬的，但是确实技术上和国外的产品有很大的差距，希望瑞星少一些口水，多花精力提高自身技术才是王道，此外比较一下瑞星和BD，查杀率相差10%以上，其他方面也有差距，尤其在未知防御能力上，所以不管360是好还是坏，至少360的免费杀毒比瑞星好很多，因为人家用的是BD引擎，泉瑞星少来这一套：我们不怕和BD这样的国外厂商比拼技术，至少和BD有很大的差距。。。
谢谢大家~~~
[ 本帖最后由 MINGLIHE 于 2008-9-4 07:29 编辑 ] | 
发表于 2008-9-4 01:46:50
发表于 2008-9-4 01:56:02
瑞星不是勇气可嘉!而是自寻死路
