Serious efforts of the antivirus industry are focused on proactive methods of antivirus protection, which allow antivirus software to combat malicious programs that have undergone modifications and those that are still unknown. This development trend is the most promising on the market and almost every developer likes to emphasize just how good their proactive defense is.

It should be noted that proactive technologies encompass a wide range of concepts and approaches, and it is impossible to take all of them into account within a single test. In this test we will only compare the heuristic components of antivirus protection (heuristic + generic detection, i.e., extended signatures), without taking into account an analysis of system events (behavior blockers or HIPS).

The results of the test make it possible to conclude how effective a heuristic analyzer is and in which antivirus product this component works better.

As an addendum, a final measurement of the detection level for the collection of malware samples was performed on the updated antivirus software a week after the main test. As a result, the quality of detection for new viruses, as well as the effectiveness of the classical signature-based method of each antivirus program was ascertained in addition to their heuristics.

• Methodology used in testing of proactive antivirus protection »
• Analysis of the test results and awards

Key results of the testing (detection – false alarm)

Award	Products
Gold Proactive Protection Award Download GIF image (500х500px)	Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2009 (61% - 0.01%) Eset Nod32 Anti-Virus 3.0 (61% - 0.02%) BitDefender Antivirus 2009 (60% - 0.04%)
Silver Proactive Protection Award Download GIF image (500х500px)	Avira AntiVir Premium 8.2 (71% - 0.13%) Dr.Web 5.0 (61% - 0.2%) AVG Anti-Virus 8.0 (58% - 0.02%) Avast! Professional Edition 4.8 (53% - 0.03%) Norton Anti-Virus 2009 (52% - 0%) VBA32 Antivirus 3.12 (45% - 0.07%) F-Secure Anti-Virus 2009 (44% - 0.03%)
Bronze Proactive Protection Award Download GIF image (500х500px)	Panda Antivirus 2009 (38% - 0.02%) Trend Micro Internet Security 2009 (37% - 0.04%) Agnitum Outpost Anti-Virus Pro 2009 (33% - 0.07%)
Failed	Sophos Anti-Virus 7.0 (61% - 2.24%)

 Key results from the proactive antivirus protection test in HTML»

Complete results for each antivirus product are available only in HTML (click on the link above).

The industry has recently witnessed a shift in emphasis to so-called proactive methods of antivirus protection, which allow antivirus software to combat malicious programs that have undergone modifications and those that are as yet unknown. This development trend is the most promising on the market and almost every developer likes to emphasize just how good their proactive defense is.

There are even attempts to contrast the newer proactive technologies with the older reactive technologies that use signature-based methods to detect malware and that require continuous and rapid updates of antivirus databases.

The concept of proactive protection is, of course, extremely attractive: a virus hasn’t even appeared and already there is protection against it. But the question arises as to just how effective these technologies are.

It should be noted that proactive technologies encompass a broad range of concepts and approaches, and including them all within the framework of a single test is simply not feasible. In this test we will only compare the heuristic components of antivirus protection (heuristic + generic detection, i.e., extended signatures), without taking into account an analysis of system events (behavior blockers or HIPS).

The results of the test make it possible to say how effective a heuristic analyzer is and in which antivirus product this component performs the best.

As an addendum, a final measurement of the detection level for the collection of malware samples was performed on the updated antivirus software a week after the main test. As a result, the quality of detection for new viruses, as well as the effectiveness of the classical signature-based method of each antivirus program was ascertained in addition to their heuristics. 

• Methodology used in testing of proactive antivirus protection »

Latest test results (14/01/2008)

Award	Products
Gold Proactive Protection Award Download GIF image (500х500px)	Avira AntiVir Personal Edition Premium 7.0 (71%) BitDefender Antivirus 2008 (65%)
Silver Proactive Protection Award Download GIF image (500х500px)	ESET NOD32 Anti-Virus 3.0 (59%) Dr.Web 4.44 (57%) Sophos Anti-Virus 7.0 (56%) Avast! Professional Edition 4.7 (52%) VBA32 Antivirus 3.12 (48%) Kaspersky Anti-Virus 7.0 (45%) McAfee VirusScan Plus 2008 (43%)
Bronze Proactive Protection Award Download GIF image (500х500px)	Symantec Anti-Virus 2008 (38%) AVG Anti-Virus Professional Edition 7.5 (37%) F-Secure Anti-Virus 2008 (36%) Trend Micro Antivirus plus Antispyware 2008 (30%) Panda Antivirus 2008 (20%)
Failed	Agnitum Outpost Security Suite 2008 (12%)

 Key results from the proactive antivirus protection test in HTML»

Complete results for each antivirus product are available only in HTML (click on the link above).