Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi, i have been doing some malware analysis for the past few months and learning about it. Also i have been browsing several forums and found that the only AV that gives problem to the malware authors is the run-time detection feature of ESET. Every other malware developer is making a thread on "How to bypass ESET runtime detection? " or "FUD stub except ESET runtime" or some expert developers showing off how they were able to crypt their payload to escape ESET run-time detection.

So, i looked into the websites doing AV software comparisons and none of those websites or any youtube video about AV software reviews/comparisons mention anything about the superiority of ESET run-time detection mechanism. Why i am saying this is, "If you want to know who the best cop is you should ask that question to the robbers", because the robbers are probably the ones who will give you the correct answer ! Since this being the ESET forum could anyone tell me why ESET runtime detection is considered as being the best by the malware authors ? 

I was using ESET IS, but since i bought a new laptop i though of trying Kaspersky  30 day trial.  It is also good but bit heavier than ESET and it blocks tracking by websites as an extra feature. Also i noticed that ESET would block certain websites saying "Script inject trojan blocked" and wouldnt let me visit it. But Kaspersky is allowing me to visit those websites and dosent show any warnings of script inject( I dunno if Kaspersky is actually blocking the trojan or not able to detect it altogether) The AV comparative websites and youtube videos put "Kaspersky,ESET & Bitdefender" in the top 3 places (not in any particular order) My Kaspersky trial expires tomorrow. So need to make a quick decision ! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

@itman, it appears that your post was made twice and we both attempted to remove the redundant one at the same time, causing both to be deleted. We are trying to restore it. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK ....... Will try to post again.

To begin, only use AV lab comparative tests for AV effectiveness evaluation purposes. They are the only source where it can be assured that malware detection testing is being done properly.

As far as Kaspersky vs. Eset, they both offer equivalent malware protection. The feature that Kaspersky has that Eset does not is system snapshot capability. This allows Kaspersky to rollback system changes after a malware detection. On the other hand, it does impact system performance as you noted.

Then there is the issue that Kaspersky software is banned from U.S. government use and that most major U.S. based retailers refuse to sell the product.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...