I have done testing of ClamAV (through the ClamAV LiveCD that I make) and Norton (latest version) in the shop that I work in and generally ClamAV has been at least as thorough as Norton because of at least two things.
A) When scanning with the LiveCD, you have access to otherwise protected Windows files that wouldn't be scanned otherwise and that are commonly infected. B) You have access to protected and passworded accounts that otherwise wouldn't be scanned unless the user logged in and initiated a scan themselves. Hope this helps. On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 11:01 +0000, Nigel Horne wrote: > > I just ran across this. I question how accurate it is though. > > > > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/avtestresults_2D2008q1.pdf > > I believe that tests clamwin, not clamav, in spite of what it says. > > > > -- > > Gerard > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -Nigel > _______________________________________________ > Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net > http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html -- Thanks, Brandon Home Page: http://www.volatileminds.net _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
