Analytics

3/12/2008
09:20 AM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

AV Still Weak on Rootkit Detection, Fixing Infections

New AV-Test.org results reveal some nagging problems with antivirus products

Independent antivirus testing organization AV-Test.org has released new test results on the latest versions of 30 antivirus products, and the report cards weren't all good.

None of the AV products scored straight As, and a few failed in some categories, such as remediation from malware infections and AV's old nemesis, rootkit detection.

New malware just keeps on coming, according to the report. In January and February alone, AV-Test.org discovered a whopping 1.1 million samples of unique malware spreading around the Net. The organization found nearly 5.5 million total during all of last year, up from 972,000 in 2006. (See Bake-off: Many AV Products Can't Detect Rootkits.)

“We thought it would be a good idea to start a new test of anti-malware software in order to see how well the tools are currently performing, given the masses of malware ‘in the wild,’” says Andreas Marx, CEO and managing director for the Germany-based AV-Test.org. AV-Test.org only tested the newest versions (as of March 1) of the English-language versions of the products, he says.

Researcher Alex Eckelberry, who is president and CEO of Sunbelt Software, took the results a step further by assigning them equivalent letter grades.

AV-Test tested the products on their on-demand detection of malware; on-demand detection of adware and spyware; false positives per 100,000 files; performance (scanning speed); proactive detection of new and unknown malware; response time to new widespread malware; and detection of active, running rootkits; and remediation.

Each product had its ups and downs in various categories. While Microsoft’s Forefront aced the false positives test and got a 98 percent score in remediation -- for instance, it received the equivalent of an “F” for its response time to new widespread malware outbreaks, taking more than eight hours to do so.

"There is this problem with remediation. I think that was borne out in the test results, which showed the lowest scores all around in remediation -- basically, a C -- score if you average it out," Eckelberry says. "So if the user caught something, how are they going to get rid of it? This often involved a process of trying multiple programs and remedies... I think this might be due in part to legacy antivirus engines dealing with highly complex threats."

Aside from the same troubles with rootkit detection, which scored an average C-, performance was a problem in the tests, he says. "An antivirus product is worse than useless if the user uninstalls it due to frustration with high resource usage, slow boot times, endless pop-ups -- and worse, an inability to deal effectively with certain types of malware," he says.

Overall, Sophos scored well (all As and Bs) in the AV-Test.org tests, as did Symantec’s Norton Antivirus (five As, two Bs, and a C in response time to new malware, with a 4- to 6-hour window). McAfee got all As and Bs, except for two Cs -- in performance, and in response time to new malware (4-6 hours).

CA’s eTrust VET earned the dubious distinction of scoring the lowest of all of the products in detecting adware and spyware, with only a 56.5 percent success rate, while K7 Computing wasn’t far behind, with a 59.5 percent rate of detection. K7 fared better in malware detection, with a score of 65.5 percent, and CA’s eTrust VET was more successful, with a 72.1 percent score.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Discuss" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

  • Sophos plc
  • Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT)
  • Symantec Corp. (Nasdaq: SYMC)
  • McAfee Inc. (NYSE: MFE) Kelly Jackson Higgins is Executive Editor at DarkReading.com. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

    Comment  | 
    Print  | 
    More Insights
  • Comments
    Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
    White House Cybersecurity Strategy at a Crossroads
    Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  7/17/2018
    What's Cooking With Caleb Sima
    Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  7/12/2018
    Mueller Probe Yields Hacking Indictments for 12 Russian Military Officers
    Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  7/13/2018
    Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
    White Papers
    Video
    Cartoon Contest
    Current Issue
    Flash Poll
    Twitter Feed
    Dark Reading - Bug Report
    Bug Report
    Enterprise Vulnerabilities
    From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
    CVE-2014-0243
    PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
    Check_MK through 1.2.5i2p1 allows local users to read arbitrary files via a symlink attack to a file in /var/lib/check_mk_agent/job.
    CVE-2014-2302
    PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
    The installer script in webEdition CMS before 6.2.7-s1 and 6.3.x before 6.3.8-s1 allows remote attackers to conduct PHP Object Injection attacks by intercepting a request to update.webedition.org.
    CVE-2018-7602
    PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
    A remote code execution vulnerability exists within multiple subsystems of Drupal 7.x and 8.x. This potentially allows attackers to exploit multiple attack vectors on a Drupal site, which could result in the site being compromised. This vulnerability is related to Drupal core - Highly critical - Rem...
    CVE-2018-14332
    PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
    An issue was discovered in Clementine Music Player 1.3.1. Clementine.exe is vulnerable to a user mode write access violation due to a NULL pointer dereference in the Init call in the MoodbarPipeline::NewPadCallback function in moodbar/moodbarpipeline.cpp. The vulnerability is triggered when the user...
    CVE-2018-1529
    PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
    IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation 5.0 through 5.0.2, 6.0 through 6.0.5 and IBM Rational Requirements Composer 5.0 through 5.0.2 are vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potential...