Comments on: Better Behavioral Detection

By: ThreatFire Blogger

ThreatFire Blogger — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 15:39:00 +0000

Hey hapbt thanks for your interest. While we are interested in the study too and the opinions of the authors, we really don’t comment on the PR, development and support processes at other vendors. I would guess that the authors at n.runs are accessible and they would be happy to offer their views and experience. Thanks for the posts.

By: hapbt

hapbt — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:53:00 +0000

btw i would really really be interested to hear your personal opinions on various a/v vendors

By: hapbt

hapbt — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:51:00 +0000

as a sysadmin i’m really curious about which venders were the most responsive and had the most transparent security processes. i understand they probably left that out of their data to keep the issue of bias out, but just seeing who had the most vulnerabilities really didn’t tell me which vendor is the best/worst.
someone has a ton of vulnerabilities, say symantec, but maybe its because their software has many more subsystems and provides more options, etc, and maybe they are way more responsive to feedback (maybe not)– they might still be a better vendor than AVG even tho AVG has less known holes. maybe not.
i think the biggest thing to come out of this is further proof that mcafee as a corporation has a bad attitude towards security and you should think twice about trusting their products, when they would rather use PR than programming to fix their software.