In case you haven't been following this, the AV-Comparatives November 2005 results are out. If you follow the link, go to the Comparative #8 halfway down the page; I apologize for not providing a direct link, but I'm following their "Terms of Use" and linking to anything other than the "main page" is verboten (literally - it's a German site.)
Here's my take on this. On the one hand, I find the fact that AV-Comparatives is doing independent research on AV accuracy to be useful to the community. I would take issue with some of the specifics about the methodology (like the lack of easy-to-follow transparency into the lab testing,) but that's just a minor point. On the other hand, I find the ridiculous FUD that their reports are being used to perpetuate to be reprehensible. "Majority of... Corporations are Vulnerable...", "Alarming Findings..." etc. Granted, this noise isn't coming from AV-Comparatives and instead from ESET, but maybe AV-Comparatives could use their copyright to distance themselves from the FUD. So, sort of "mixed props" to AV-Comparatives.
Also, I'm interested to see how StopSign plays out in the long-term. Interestingly, they have chosen to almost completely ignore the security community and are instead focusing a tremendous amount of marketing dollars on the public at large: you won't see them in SC Magazine, Information Security Magazine, or the like but you will see them on CNBC's SquawkBox, MSNBC, on CNNfn, etc. I'm curious to see how well this tactic works in the long-term. I haven't used the product, so I can't comment on how it works per se, but I'll be keeping my eyes open.
Posted by Ed at December 5, 2005 11:10 AM