Savernova Network ID PRO TECTSTA R™ ™ AW ARD Protectstar 2008
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Savernova Network ID PRO TECTSTA R™ ™ AW ARD PROTECTsTAR 2008 ProtectStar™ Comparison Test 2008 Internet Security Suites TABLE OF CONTENTS: Page 2 Table of Contents Page 3 A.) Tested Products and Versions B.) Background Information C.) General Explanation of the Test Procedures Page 4 D.) Evaluation Criteria Page 5 E.) Test: SECURITY THE FIREWALL – external protection THE FIREWALL – internal protection MALWARE DETECTION SECURITY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PROTECTSTAR™ Page 9 F.) Test: USER-FRIENDLINESS Page 12 G.) Test: PERFORMANCE Page 14 H.) Test: PRICE/EQUIPMENT RATIO Page 15 I.) CONCLUSION Page 16 K.) CONCLUSION II (recommendations) Page 17 Comments, Criticism and Donations Contact & Copyright 2 PRO TECTSTA R™ ™ AW ARD PROTECTsTAR 2008 A.) Tested Products and Versions Manufacturer Product Name Setup file size Release (version) Agnitum OutpostPro Security Suite 2008 30,4 MB 6.0.2225.232.0465 Avira Premium Security Suite 2008 18,8 MB 7.06.00.168 BitDefender Internet Security 2008 41,8 MB n/a BullGuard BullGuard 8.0 30,4 MB n/a ESET Smart Security 3.0 18.0 MB 3.0.621 F-Secure Internet Security 2008 81,9 MB n/a G DATA Internet Security 2008 201,8 MB 18.0.7295.201 Kaspersky Internet Security 7.0 28,9 MB 7.0.1.321 McAfee Internet Security 2008 38,7 MB n/a Microsoft Live OneCare 2.0 n/a 2.0.2500.14 Panda Internet Security 2008 50,0 MB 12.00.00 Symantec Norton Internet Security 2008 61,5 MB n/a Trend Micro Internet Security 2008 88,3 MB 16.00.1645 n/a = no details available as not shown in program itself B.) Background Information available. In doing so, the main focus of by the integrated personal firewall. The The ProtectStar™ TestLab (www. the test series lay on the security settings main spotlight was placed on the factory protectstar-testlab.org) is regularly asked of the products as supplied to the customer settings, i.e. the security suites in the state about secure and modern security solutions (default settings following installation). We in which they are delivered to customers. for IT and communication systems of all also asked: “External protection” means that a kinds, and increasingly the questions are security check was carried out with a coming from individuals with responsibility how good is the security provided by the PC or laptop directly connected to the for IT matters within their organisations who suite following installation and without Internet, e.g. by directly connecting the find the test results published in specialist any configuration changes? PC/laptop to a DSL modem (not via a forums and magazines both irritating and router, hardware firewall or the like). confusing. are the program alerts and user “Internal protection” means that information coherent? security tests were carried out on the For instance, it can be mystifying for a user personal firewall while the computer was to see one magazine pick “Security Suite A” is system performance impacted? within a LAN. A LAN (such as a home as its no. 1 (out of ten or more contenders) or corporate network) is considered a while another specialist journal only rates Thirteen of the Internet security suites trusted zone and many personal firewalls the product as “average”, putting it in currently available on the IT security market only monitor it with low security settings seventh or eighth spot. The ways in which were tested. The ProtectStar™ TestLab as a result. In this area, analysis was firewalls are tested for user-friendliness, is planning to compare all of the suites carried out on what could happen if a performance and security can also be very available worldwide with one another in the LAN computer had already been infected vague or simply not dealt with at all. future. Therefore, suites which were not or a guest computer acted as a hacker. Users generally seem to be more satisfied available for this test, such as those from Comprehensive analysis of the virus and with how virus detection rates are arrived avast!, AVG, Norman, Sophos, Trustport, malware detection rates of the engines in at. However, complaints about a certain ZoneAlarm, and many more, will be taken the Internet security suites that were tested imprecision or generalisation in this area into consideration in the next comparison was carried out in cooperation with AV- are also still quite common as many test. Comparatives (www.av-comparatives.org). comparison tests only focus on how well the products detect malware. C.) General Explanation of the The term “malware” as used here Test Procedures incorporates viruses, worms, trojans, etc. Given the clamour for clear and meaningful Testing was carried out under In the area of USER-FRIENDLINESS, test results, ProtectStar™ felt compelled laboratory and real conditions. we looked at the installation and removal to carry out a comparison test on the In the area of SECURITY, the focus lay on of the suite, the coherence of the Internet security suites that are currently the external and internal protection provided information and the individual setting and 3 PRO TECTSTA R™ ™ AW ARD PROTECTsTAR 2008 configuration options, both during and D.) Evaluation Criteria after the installation. Attention was also All of the 13 Internet security suites tested For the reasons mentioned above, 10% of given to the manual (sometimes included are exclusively security solutions which the overall evaluation was based on the in delivery in a printed form) and its promise and should, above all, guarantee rice/equipment ratio. coherence, the online help available and the user excellent protection from modern Therefore, the ProtectStar™ TestLab FAQs. Scrutiny of the availability of a boot risks such as hackers, viruses, rootkits, decided to use the following 200-point CD (rescue CD/DVD) and the possibility to keyloggers, phishing and pharming attacks, system as the basis for the evaluation: create a rescue CD rounded off this area. and much more. As these are security In the PERFORMANCE segment, a wide products, the main focus necessarily had Of the 200 points available in total, the range of computer systems were available to lie on the security functions contained biggest portion (100 points) was allocated for the thirteen Internet security suites. within the respective security suites. to security. These 100 points were divided Besides security, both user-friendliness such that max. 30 points could be allocated and performance are particularly for the firewall’s external protection, 20 Features of the test computers essential in practice. For this reason, both points for its internal protection, 45 points (from – to): areas received equal weighting in the for malware detection [in the case of evaluation. malware detection, 1 point was subtracted Operating system: for every 1% lacking in the detection rate] Windows XP with Service Pack 2 and/or Less essential for the security of a product, and a further 5 points for miscellaneous Windows Vista but still worth mentioning, is the price/ security functions such as the quality of equipment ratio. A modern Internet the alerts, log files, intrusion prevention CPU: security suite should – in a comparison systems, host protection, multiple anti- 566MHz [single-core] – 2400 MHz [quad- with products from competitors – guarantee virus scanners, etc. [30 + 20 + 45 + 5 = core] (average: 1.8GHz dual-core) maximum security regardless of how high 100 points]. or low the purchase price is. In this respect, RAM: the user should not initially be significantly 80 points in total were available for user- 256–4096 MB SDRAM and DDR-RAM influenced by additional features such friendliness and performance. Each of (average: 1024 MB DDR-RAM) as tuning or backup programs or extra these areas could receive a maximum of licences thrown in with the purchase. On 40 points. Hard drive: the other hand, there are particular savings 10–1000 GB, IDE and S-ATA (average: to be made by the user if he doesn’t have Finally, a total of 20 points was available 120 GB S-ATA hard drive) to purchase a separate backup program for the price/equipment ratio. because a storage solution of equal value Outside of the range, we evaluated is already included in the Internet security whether the products could also be used suite he has purchased. The same applies as required by users if only the minimum to system optimisation and parental control system requirements specified by the programs. manufacturers were available. PRICE/EQUIPMENT RATIO: What is the relationship between the price of a security suite and what it contains? In other words, what additional software modules (such as backup, tuning, etc.) are delivered to the Security (100P). user and how many licences are included? The price difference between the boxed and download versions when purchasing User-friendliness (40 P.) the suite from the manufacturer and the so- Performance (40 P.) called “street” price on Amazon, the online Price / Equipment ratio (20 P.) mail-order company, was also evaluated. 4 PRO TECTSTA R™ ™ AW ARD PROTECTsTAR 2008 E.) Test: SECURITY 1.) THE FIREWALL–external protection all ports (0 – 65535). In a second step, Every security suite evaluated by the the firewalls were subjected to a SYN port ProtectStar™ TestLab contained an scan (half-open), known as a stealth scan. integrated personal firewall monitoring Furthermore, the personal firewalls were incoming and outgoing connections. The exposed to 33 specific attack variations personal firewalls were analysed in their for firewalls. All of the personal firewalls default settings, i.e. as they are configured successfully fended off these attacks. when delivered to the customer. As already mentioned in the “General Explanation of The port scans which were carried out (tcp- the Test Procedures” section, two aspects connect and syn/half-open) did not detect of the personal firewalls were analysed: the any open ports or unnecessary services that external protection (attacker -> Internet usually pose security issues.