Cylance vs. Symantec Endpoint and ESET Endpoint. By AV-Comparatives & MRG Effitas

[SweX 871]

Interesting note.....

 

Getting Products

 

Both, AV-Comparatives and MRG Effitas tried to get a license for CylanceProtect. Unfortunately, this was nearly impossible. It was tried via two IT system houses (one in Italy, one in Austria). Both did not get any license, even if they asked for a regular sales. Fortunately, a third party granted access to the license of Cylance. This behaviour is seen by many of the newer products that claim to be next generation. It looks like they try to avoid getting tested in order to continue to attract users simple by unproven marketing claims .   

 

The other tested vendor gave the license immediately for free.

 

The costs of the test have been covered by the testing labs, no vendor commissioned this specific test.

 

.....And interesting results.....

 

CylancePROTECT vs. Symantec Endpoint Protection

hxxp://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/avc_mrg_prot_2016_02_24_cyl_sym_en.pdf

 

CylancePROTECT vs. ESET Endpoint Security

hxxp://cdn5.esetstatic.com/eset/US/resources/docs/reports/avc_mrg_prot_2016_02_24_cyl_eset_exploit_only_en.pdf

Edited April 2, 2016 by SweX

[Patch 16]

Results show:

Exploit testing, ESET endpoint score much better than CylancePROTECT and a little better than Symantec Endpoint Protection

 

In-the-wild malware protection appears to not be reported for ESET. Selective omission of test results I always find concerning or have I just missed it?

[toxinon12345 32]

Impressive results taking into account it is a Exploit test. I am always wondered if vulnerabilities can be approached proactively, probably not the case as even GoogleProjectZero's people have to access to ITW exploits mainly.