This problem could lead to users losing their data when the antivirus detects false positives. Another challenge was the inability of the software to show pop-ups giving a user the option to delete or quarantine infected files. During the experiments, infected files were downloaded, and the antivirus could erase almost everything but would fail dismally to detect compressed malware. The aforementioned independent tests conducted revealed Sophos is not effective in combating compressed malware. Several other tests conducted by a few other third parties, such as the AMTSO, showed disappointing results for Sophos in anti-phishing, compressed malware, and other criteria. As much as this outcome was remarkable, it might be hard to rely on considering that threats are growing at an alarming pace. It passed all the criteria of the three categories they conducted, which were: performance, protection, and usability. In 2017 other tests were conducted by the same lab, and this time, Sophos performed better. It detected over 98% of malware, but it wasn’t the best antivirus on the shelf. The only known tests conducted by AV-Comparatives a couple of years ago. Sophos antivirus doesn’t have much measurement on performance as far as third party testing is concerned. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |