Free antimalware package Microsoft scores well at AV-Test.org
Security Essentials, Microsoft’s new free antivirus software, achieved an accuracy of 98 percent in a test by AV-Test.org in a detection test of more than half a million files. It is therefore rated ‘very good’.
The antivirus software, which was tested on Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7, had to go through the ‘WildList’, a collection of more than 3,700 malware samples, in an initial test. This part went through Security Essentials completely successfully, so reports an AV-Test.org contributor to ComputerWorld. In a second round of testing, the application had to sink its teeth into a malware collection consisting of 545,344 files. The software was able to correctly recognize 536,535 or 98.4 percent, a score that is qualified as ‘very good’ by the German independent research firm.
Security Essentials scored a lower hit rate when detecting adware and spyware; in total, 90.9 percent of the 14,222 samples were correctly recognized. However, the software was able to detect and remove the 25 rootkits included in the test files.
The good scores for the Microsoft antivirus software are not entirely surprising; the preview version also performed well in June. However, AV-Test also mentions some downsides of the scanner. For example, Security Essentials does not have a heuristic scanner engine in addition to signature detection. Using the heuristic scanning method, unknown malware can be detected on the basis of suspicious behavior. Another downside of Security Essentials, according to AV-Test, is that it leaves behind after a cleanup operation, such as empty run entries in the registry or manipulated hosts files. Also, the Microsoft package would fail to re-enable the firewall if malicious code disables it.
Symantec, producer of Norton AntiVirus, among others, does not seem impressed by the arrival of Security Essentials. Mike Plante, vice president of engineering at Symantec, called the free scanner from Microsoft this week another ‘bad product’ with ditto recognition scores. He qualified the product as a mediocre successor to the no longer existing Windows Live OneCare. In addition, Plante also criticized AV-Test’s test methodology; the German company would not process enough ‘fresh’ malware in its WildList.