Asus RoG Rocking the WebRoot Secure Anywhere
-
@Nic said in Asus RoG Rocking the WebRoot Secure Anywhere:
We have done contract buyouts before. Let me know if you want to talk to someone here.
wow i completely missed this. Ill speak to the Director.
Nic the funny thing is that I deployed your software to the company this week with a Trial offering to help with the Zepto infection. Took me about an hour or so.
-
@Brains said in Asus RoG Rocking the WebRoot Secure Anywhere:
@Nic said in Asus RoG Rocking the WebRoot Secure Anywhere:
We have done contract buyouts before. Let me know if you want to talk to someone here.
wow i completely missed this. Ill speak to the Director.
Nic the funny thing is that I deployed your software to the company this week with a Trial offering to help with the Zepto infection. Took me about an hour or so.
Nice - hope that took care of it. You can convert the trial code over to live to minimize the work if you do want to switch over.
-
@Nic Thanks Nic. BTW do you have any sources for AV comparisons or detection rates so that I can use them to compare detection rates, etc?
-
Webroot for the win
-
And a MangoLassi win, too!
-
Sure thing - here's some on performance:
http://www.passmark.com/benchmark-reports/index.htmand on efficacy:
https://www.mrg-effitas.com/recent-projects/comissioned-tests/Part of the challenge with our approach is that the traditional AV testing methodologies don't always do a good job of measuring how we work. Some of them are willing to work with us, others aren't and we've just opted to not be included in their tests (looking at you AV Comparatives
) -
@Nic said in Asus RoG Rocking the WebRoot Secure Anywhere:
Sure thing - here's some on performance:
http://www.passmark.com/benchmark-reports/index.htmand on efficacy:
https://www.mrg-effitas.com/recent-projects/comissioned-tests/Part of the challenge with our approach is that the traditional AV testing methodologies don't always do a good job of measuring how we work. Some of them are willing to work with us, others aren't and we've just opted to not be included in their tests (looking at you AV Comparatives
)Thanks!. I noticed you guys were missing from AV comparatives. What part of their testing makes it incompatible with your product?
-
@Brains said in Asus RoG Rocking the WebRoot Secure Anywhere:
@Nic said in Asus RoG Rocking the WebRoot Secure Anywhere:
Sure thing - here's some on performance:
http://www.passmark.com/benchmark-reports/index.htmand on efficacy:
https://www.mrg-effitas.com/recent-projects/comissioned-tests/Part of the challenge with our approach is that the traditional AV testing methodologies don't always do a good job of measuring how we work. Some of them are willing to work with us, others aren't and we've just opted to not be included in their tests (looking at you AV Comparatives
)Thanks!. I noticed you guys were missing from AV comparatives. What part of their testing makes it incompatible with your product?
Most of the traditional testing is based around signature detection. Either a signature is a match or it isn't, using that method. That doesn't take into account our monitoring and rollback technology, which might not initially see a process as malicious, but then later our database/threat researchers make a determination and then can revert changes for a malicious process. The testing field is a bit in flux at the moment with all the newer endpoint protection software that's coming out like us, Cylance, Barkly, etc.
-
I've never liked those AV testing suites. They can't really test what is in the real world, so they can be rather misleading. And when someone is really good, their competitors tend to pay for them not to be included in the tests.
-
@StrongBad said in Asus RoG Rocking the WebRoot Secure Anywhere:
I've never liked those AV testing suites. They can't really test what is in the real world, so they can be rather misleading. And when someone is really good, their competitors tend to pay for them not to be included in the tests.
It's a good point. If the AV testing company knows about it and tests for it, then chances are all the AV suites have seen it too. It's very hard to get a fair "real world" test of true zero day threats. My thought would be a better metric would be a sort of "time to respond" metric for security companies. When a new vulnerability hits the streets, how long does it take for all the security companies to remedy it? That would take a lot of work though.
