On Saturday 22 Oct 2011 21:31:32 Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 20:03:44 +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > > ClamVM has poor detection rates. You might want to look into AVG Free > > for Linux. > > Do you have any documentation for this? > > I'm not saying you're wrong, rather that I'd like to know more.
This is not current, but if it is to be believed (and without details on the methodology I'd be reluctant to believe it) clamav came 2nd after Karspersky: http://www.builderau.com.au/blogs/byteclub/viewblogpost.htm?p=339270831 This on the other hand is both current and more meaningful, because it includes zero day attacks: http://www.shadowserver.org/wiki/pmwiki.php/AV/VirusDailyStats ClamAV on linux comes 3rd for zero day attacks and 16th on retries. -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
