The End of Signature-Based Antivirus Software?

nosig writes "PCMagazine is running a story around the latest AV-TEST response time and proactive detection test for the latest MS05-039 vulnerability related attacks. The test results were announced by the author to the focus-virus discussion list. What's really impresive, besides the huge difference between response times among antivirus companies, is that two products succeeded to proactively detect all 6 attacks without any signature update. "

Comments

Excel sheet Zip file????

[gtrubetskoy]

From the referred posting: You can find the information how fast the AV companies have reacted with a solution against Bozari.A/B, Drudgebot.B, IRCBot!Var and Zotob.A/B in an Excel sheet (18 KB ZIP file) which is available at http://www.av-test.org./

At first glance this looks like a clever variation on "important document attached" e-mails we all get every day...

Re:Excel sheet Zip file????

[milimetric]

what I find interesting here is that whereas in the detection time sorted column Symantec performed at an average level, in the alphabetically sorted column they performed very badly, being one of the last ones in the list. Judging by a quick glance at this, I will switch my antivirus software to AntiVir which was at the TOP of the list.

The death of X

[twigles]

This week on /., "The Death of [fill in the blank]!" It's just one test, slow down and breath.

I don't know about you, but I saw this coming.

[Bnderan]

Sheesh...This should be obvious to anyone that MS05-039 totally outclasses MS05-038 in proactive detection test response time. NTIKWTFIATA

Re:Virus proliferation

[sootman]

Average Joe doesn't see why they should have to pay to keep their AV software updated. ("I paid $XXX for this machine, and they want more? Heck no.")

Understandable. $30 was a lot of money in ancient Roman times.