@ wrote:

Why isn't Webroot tested in Consumer Reports??

For crying out loud, send them a copy.

That is a good question, although we can't actually send them a copy.  Consumer Reports purchases all the things they test off the shelf, so that they don't get special treatment in their reviews, and to avoid any impropriety.

 

I'll reach out to the person who handles working with testing companies.  We do have problems with some of the testing methodology since we work so differently from the definition based AV programs.

---

Hi drcrypto

 

Welcome to the Community Forums.

 

Currently few testing organisations test WSA in a comparative test, although a couple do in certain test...whichnis more than was the case even 6 months ago, and the reason is becuase there is little point due to the unique philosophy that WSA follows in terms of how it works.

 

Whilst the past it was tested again more 'traditional' AVs/ISs it fared badly and so Webroot bowed out of these but has been working in background with some of the organisations to try to help them to develop representative tests that give WSA a fair crack of the whip. When tested in the wild WSA is more than a match for its competitors but in laboratory tests...at present there is no point becuase where as the competitors use signature & heuristic detection methods WSA use heuristics and what is effectively whitelisting using a cloud database. Also WSA only considers a file or an apps as malicious, even if it actually contains malicious code, ONLY if and when that app is ACTIVE...a non active piece of malware is no threat to anybody until it activates...so from that approach if just testing for the presence of the dormant package being resident WSA will show poor results...but tested against active threats WSA is IMHO peerless.

 

I hope that answers you question?



Regards, Baldrick

---