Online Armor temporarily disqualified on Matousec Proactive Security Challenge

It does seem strange that if any money is owed by Tall Emu that Matousec has not taken legal action to recoup that money, maybe the amount owed is not significant enough to take legal action so Matousec is playing games with an innocent party (Emsisoft). Either way IMHO it does bring into question the corporate ethics of Matousec, by all means attack Tall Emu if money is owed legitimatley but why involve Emsisoft who had no involement in buisness dealings of Tall Emu when it owned OA

Nessy

 

Hi Nessy - we do not owe anything to Matousec. Matousec wants us to give him a lot of money, but we do not owe him money.

Exactly.

 

Matousec needs to give me some money.

 

I read some material regarding vendor services on the Matousec site.

If I read it right vendors have the "right" for free tests every 6 months.

If they all did that ONLY (not my recommendation if any asked)

Then the flow of $ to them would be zero.

 

First, I don't trust any corporation, even those I like, except the trust of I verify. Second, I just have an XP Pro, SP3, AMD Athlon 5000 Dual Core, 2.21 GHz, and 1 Gig of ram and I don't have the slowdown that you perceive on your system. The only other real time security I have are PrevX with SafeOnline and Sandboxie when running browser, mail, or testing a new install.

Which other real time security or utility processes do you run? I normally have a dictionary, search, auto defrag, and System Explorer running in background, but still no substantial hit. What are you doing or running that slows your computer? Probably with some electronic measuring equipment there would be measurable difference though minute, but there is no discernible (with just senses) difference.

I know that systems even with similar sets are individual. I know that the top six in Matousec tests would probably be fine. I don't like Comodo. The times I tried it it was buggy. Some friends like it.

But to the nitty, I take the word of my friends, colleagues, reviews of tech reviewers I respect and trust, and last testing sites. There is one suite that Matousec gives low scores that I found to be really good in the field. Matousec was only testing the firewall, but the antivirus feature stopped the attacks of Matousec's tests. I don't use suites anymore. I like components for security, best of breed.

The ConsumerSearch results mean more to me than Matousec, so too the Shield's Up, Security Space Desktop Audit, and reviews in the Home PC Firewall Guide Site, Gizmo's TechSupport Alert, and some reviewers such as Neil Rubenking and the folk at Windows Secrets, and last, but not least some of the opinions expressed here and the other few good forums. One testing site is meaningless; the collective wisdom consensus of all the above, plus my experience, is more reliable for choosing any firewall or security program.

 

Who cares what Matousec says.
Its always about money.

 

i wrote to Matousec about my concerns of them not providing a level playing field for all participants in their tests by having companies paying for every re-test.

their answer:
-----------------------------------
Hello,

Thank you for your message.
Obviously, it is a lie. It is easy to verify on our web pages. The rules are fixed and public, the tests are public. Every vendor has a
right to request the test of its product for free. All this information is clearly written on our website. It is just that some people are
lazy to read the available information and try to fabricate nonsense.

Kind Regards,

--
www.matousec.com Support
Different Internet Experience Ltd.
------------------------------------------

 

Oh please. The short version: No company is going to pay for anything like a retest if it didn't give them an advantage.

Let's analyse this situation using the rules published at Matousec's site.

From the Proactive Security Challenge rules:

This means that if you rely on a free test, you get one test every 6 months, and follow the rules about all levels not being tested. The frequency of testing can only be 3 months after the last free testing. If you have more than one product that is tested, your frequency may be less.

But if you pay, not only is your product tested against all levels, you get the chance to keep them quiet if they are bad, and you can get a test every month.

This clearly gives people who pay a real advantage.

Let's work out a real example.

If you take two companies who are competitive in the tests ( A and B).

Company A and B are tested (free). Assume their scores are close, and they both fail a couple of tests.

Both companies immediately fix and release the product.

Company A - does not pay. 3 months later (or 6 months later) - Matousec will test again, and now they score higher.

Company B - immediately pays for a retest. One month later, Matousec will test again - and now, they score higher.

So, by paying for the test Company B does get an advantage over company A. They get their better results published betwen 2 and 5 months sooner that the other company who just takes the free testing, despite the fact that they both fixed the problem at the same time.

Moreover, there is no risk for the Company B, because if the results are bad - they can remain unpublished. They could wait another month, and get another retest, and only publish those results if they are good.

So - is it lies and nonsense and fabrication to say that paying for tests gives companies an advantage? Clearly not.

 

@ Mike Nash.

tnx for the explanations.

i of course didn't put much confidence in Matousec's reply in the first place.

too bad there doesn't seem to be a trustworthy company doing honest firewall testings at he moment.

 

Sorry for the OT but I remember a few years ago there was a French site running a variety of HIPS tests that for the life of me I can't remember the name.If memory serves me it was fairly comprehensive,does anyone know if it's still active

 

Do you mean this site?

 

Or this? http://www.firewallleaktester.com/

 

@ andyman35

I'll bet it's kareldjag's www that Creer posted, but having just seen MikeNash's post, it might be that Both very good resources

 

I think you mean this one

http://membres.multimania.fr/nicmtests/Unhookers/unhooking_tests.htm

 

Thanks guys.

It was the Kareldjag site but alas it's no longer being maintained.They ran some pretty decent tests there too.I'll take a look at the other suggestions because I refuse to believe Matousec is as good as it gets for information