Are all anti-virus solutions the same?

by Anton Chuvakin

Related link:,295796,sid6_iss407_art803,00.html

Lots of people came to think that anti-virus technology (being one of the oldest commercial security solutions) has essentially converged to a common feature set and "commoditized". Thus, it doesn't really matter anymore what antiviral solution you run, you'd get about the same level of protection.

Ed Skoudis's latest study reveals that the above it glaringly not true: "Strikingly, the capabilities and reliability of the [anti-virus] products varied greatly... We discovered that not all AV products are equal, and many don't provide the protection you think they do." Read up this fun piece to get the details and (likely) be surprised!


2004-06-22 00:06:41
someone paid for this it seems...
All over the article Symantec is described as among the worst of the crop, EXCEPT the user interface.

Then in the final conclusions, Symantec comes in second after NAI which reads as average just about everywhere else.

In contrast, Kaspersky and Panda are listed everywhere as strong, yet in the final conclusions are "best of the rest".

Makes you wonder where the sponsoring of the article comes from.

2004-06-22 00:09:41
someone paid for this it seems...
and yes, I've used all 4 of those products myself in various settings over the years.

Panda is by far my favourite, catching several potentials from my mailserver cache during installation that NAI didn't catch even during a full system scan I performed just before removing it and installing Panda (the mailserver was disabled from accepting mail and the network disabled while this operation was in progress).

If they don't catch all loggers and spyware, they never claim to.
Panda has a separate product for that and states so clearly.