Review Analysis Board (RAB) News
AMTSO intends to provide public analysis of anti-malware reviews. This analysis will be done by comparing the testing methodology used in product reviews to AMTSO?s standards for anti-malware testing. The primary goal of this analysis is to provide consumers with information on the accuracy and reliability of product reviews, and to improve the overall quality of anti-malware testing.
Review Analysis
Date of publication review: 6 May 2010
Date of publication test : 26 October 2009
Testing organization: Dennis Technology Labs
Report title: “PC Virus Protection 2010 II” test report
Methodology version: 1.2
Challenging organization: Simon Edwards, Dennis Technology Labs
Reviewers: David Harley, ESET; David Perry, Trend Micro; John Hawes, Virus Bulletin; Jong Purisima, Webroot.
Chairperson and liaison: Alice Decker, Trend Micro
Summary
The Dennis Technology Labs PC Virus Protection test report (see above) was submitted by the testing organization for comparison against AMTSO’s Fundamental Principles of Testing. The following conclusions were reached by the Review Analysis Committee.
Review Analysis
Date of publication review: 17 March 2010
Date of publication test : 8 September 2009
Testing organization: NSS Labs
Report title: Endpoint Security - Socially Engineered Malware Protection Comparative Test Results
Methodology version: 1.2
Challenging organizations: Sophos (primary); AVG (supporting); Panda Security (supporting)
Reviewers: Simon Edwards, Dennis Technology Labs (chair); Dr. Leitold Ferenc, CheckVir; Gabor Szappanos, VirusBuster; Philipp Wolf, Avira
Summary
The NSS Labs Endpoint Security test (see above) was challenged by Sophos, AVG and Panda Security. The following conclusions were reached by the Review Analysis Committee, which compared AMTSO's Fundamental Principles of Testing to the above report. Principle 9, which relates to active contact points, was evaluated through interviews with the testing organization and the challenging organizations.
