I am sure, Marketing teams from both companies are already working overnight to prove how this report is biased or the test conditions were wrong.
According to the article:-
NSS Labs gave the products from FireEye and AhnLab the bottom scores in this evaluation and an overall rating of “caution” to buyers. NSS Labs indicates the “caution” designation means products “offer limited value for money given the 3-year TCO [total cost of ownership] and measured security effectiveness rating.”
NSS Labs tested how well malware would be caught by the AhnLab MDS, FireEye’s Web MPS 4310 and Email MPS 5300, the General Dynamics’ product Fidelis XPS Direct 1000 , the Fortinet FortiSandbox 3000D, Cisco’s Sourcefire Advanced Malware Protection, and Trend Micro’s Deep Discovery Inspector Model 1000. NSS also tested for stability and reliability, and estimated the cost effectiveness of each product.
AhnLab MDS had a 94.7% security effectiveness and the FireEye breach-detection systems had 94.5%, which placed them below the other vendor products tested which were said to range between 98% to 99.1% effective.
The test results indicate the lower score for AhnLab MDS arose in part because it “misidentified 7% of legitimate traffic as malicious (false positives),” plus detected only 94% of email malware, and 90% of exploits. It detected 100% of HTTP malware.
The FireEye MPS had a zero false positive rate as tested, but only detected 93% of exploits, 96% of email malware, and 95% of HTTP malware.
The link below has more information:-
No comments:
Post a Comment